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. ✗plicit 14:20, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of retired numbers[edit]

List of retired numbers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Previously a contested PROD; this list is an bloated WP:EXAMPLEFARM full of unsourced examples that have been left unaddressed since 2017.

Legendary sportspeople will somehow retire and their numbers will be retired, inevitably. So are going to be surprised at all by their inclusion on this list?

WP:LC, WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:LISTN also applies.

We got list of their inclusion to their halls of fame for their favourite sportspeople, most of those listed, so why should we need a WP:FANCRUFT list of examples for the most diehard fans? SpacedFarmer (talk) 11:28, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Lists of people, Sports, American football, Baseball, Basketball, Football, Ice hockey, and Motorsport. SpacedFarmer (talk) 11:28, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I created this list to preserve entries which were polluting number articles such as 1 and 97 (number), including references where provided. The article seems to be a useful and encyclopedic source of information. However, I'm not a big sports fan and don't have the 830 citations required to back up the list, which has grown by later addition of many less prominent people. For further analysis, please read Talk:List of retired numbers#Proposed deletion, June 2017. Certes (talk) 11:39, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as a redundant list. Most major sports leagues have the same list (such as List of Major League Baseball retired numbers) and those ones can present slightly more context since it is league-specific. we do not need the same information presented as a “catch-all” for every sport. Frank Anchor 11:46, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Frank Anchor. This is the sort of information which belongs on the page for each team that has retired numbers, rather than a single (numerically-organized) page to cover all teams and all leagues in all sports. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:50, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Convert to SIA - I believe this list would be more accessible if it was in tables as most of the related lists are organized; as it is, it is cumbersome to read. With that being said, this could be salvaged as a set index article by stripping it down entirely leaving only the lists in the "See also" section. I suppose it should then be moved to List of lists of retired numbers. If not, then delete. Rgrds. --BX (talk) 07:29, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per WP:NOTDIRECTORY, and failure to meet WP:LISTN for a standalone list. Flibirigit (talk) 13:59, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 14:16, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep but as a disambiguation page, used only to list the sport-specific sub-pages, given it is a likely search term. GiantSnowman 14:18, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  As the title is a description of each single-sport list rather than an alternative name, we should opt for a list of lists rather than a dab, in the same way that France is in List of countries rather than Country (disambiguation). Certes (talk) 14:41, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Then we can change the name accordingly - Lists of retired numbers in sport or similar. GiantSnowman 16:53, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Too general a title, should have been List of retired numbers in sport, however I agree with Flibirigit comment above and this to me is a breach of WP:OR. Govvy (talk) 15:36, 4 February 2024 (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.