Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

		The Original Barnstar
		I am happy that you provided a great reasoning for deletion at WP:Articles for deletion/Hughes Bowl, in that the coverage is too trivial and thus fails GNG. I also appreciate your suggestion of a future Hughes family article once less trivial coverage can be found. I had opened the AFD on my own article in the first place to get quality comments like yours on record, so your comments there are well-appreciated! — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (Goodbye!) 20:13, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, would coverage on the Hughes brothers early-life interactions with each other, and their parents' attendance/reactions to their games, count as significant coverage for a hypothetical Hughes family article? — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (Goodbye!) 20:15, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Would information in this article be significant coverage for a hypothetical Hughes family (ice hockey) article? Information from this article includes:

• "In many ways, Ellen was her boys' first coach. [...] She taught all three sons to skate, laying the foundation for what would become the most crucial element of their game, just as it was hers."
• "When Jim transitioned to a role as director of player development for the Maple Leafs, he had more time to attend the boys' practices and games, watch games with them on TV or study clips the Leafs coaches were showing their pro players."

etc.

I also found this article about the family's religious background (that it is a mixed Catholic/Jewish household) but I need confirmation on whether religious background is significant information for GNG purposes. This specific fact is already documented on Jack Hughes. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (Goodbye!) 21:57, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Of the sources you provided, I would say that the ESPN one is pretty good. Definitely not good for a Hughes Bowl article. However, I worry that having a family article breaks another policy we have. Typically, individual articles are preferred for each family member. The way they break could be the use of sources such as these. How you do that article is up to you, but I would recommend creating a draft first. Conyo14 (talk) 22:26, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

100% the Hughes Bowl article (about the 3 games themselves) is to be deleted due to the coverage in sources being too trivial to meet GNG. I'll G7 it when it devolves into too much "WP:FANCRUFT" citations.

I am creating Draft:Hughes family (ice hockey). The main focus of a family article would be the family members' interactions with each other, as well as common things family members did together that would be redundant when repeated three or four times on the pages of each family member. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (Goodbye!) 22:36, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Canucks–Flames rivalry is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canucks–Flames rivalry (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Servite et contribuere (talk) 13:32, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]