Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2013 University of Alabama football scandal

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Secret ^account 19:10, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2013 University of Alabama football scandal

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I have nominated this article for deletion. At present there isn't enough infomration to warrant an entire article. There is a section on most teams main page where NCAA violations or allegation of violations are detailed.

If the allegations lead to an investigation and major sanctions follow it could warrant it's own article at that time perhaps.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Zaqwert (talk • contribs)

Delete - Much of this seems to fail
general notability guidelines of significant coverage from multiple sources. This can be covered in summary form at Alabama Crimson Tide football#Controversies as past "scandals" have been. -Fnlayson (talk) 17:16, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete -Wikipedia is not the news. Jerry Pepsi (talk) 02:01, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (
^Notify_Online 01:58, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Alabama-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:09, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:09, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:09, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:09, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as while there might be enough substance for a line or two in the season article there's too much speculation and conflation here for an independent article. - Dravecky (talk) 02:23, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete looks like
WP:ONEEVENT to me. Incorporate into other articles.--Paul McDonald (talk) 16:38, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep A decent article can be harvested. There are enough sources including the NY Time. It has been cited. A definite keep. This is a developing and evolving current event. DeusImperator (talk) 20:59, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Which parts of the article are developing now? A Google search for articles on "Luther Davis" & Fluker only shows articles from Sept. 2013. -Fnlayson (talk) 22:47, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.