Talk:Birmingham Bulls (ECHL)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ice Hockey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of ice hockey on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ice HockeyWikipedia:WikiProject Ice HockeyTemplate:WikiProject Ice HockeyIce Hockey articles

Alabama

This article is part of WikiProject Alabama, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Alabama on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlabamaWikipedia:WikiProject AlabamaTemplate:WikiProject AlabamaAlabama articles

Contested deletion

Minor professional ice hockey teams clearly pass Wikipedia:Notability. Flibirigit (talk) 07:13, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The prodder filed on notability grounds? Now that's a headspinner and a half. If I feel bored today, I think I'm going to go over his prods and find out what other doozies he's perpetrating. Ravenswing 11:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He extracted this information from the Birmingham Bulls article for some reason. I say if you do delete this article, then at least add the information back to that article as it has been the last couple years. I see no reason it was removed from there and split into a separate article...unless it is somehow going to be improved significantly. If it is going to stay in it's current status (stub), then I say merge this section back into the main Bulls hockey article like it has been. --otduff ^t/_c 17:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. That two separate, and independent, franchises shared the same name does not warrant the information being combined into one article. It would be as silly as having one article that talks about both Mike Vernon (ice hockey) and Mike Vernon (producer). They should be kept as separate articles. Reso lute 20:00, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should also mention that being a stub is not a valid reason for removal. There are many avenues that exist to expand the article. All one has to do is look at our more fully developed team articles for examples. Reso lute 20:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Concur on both grounds. These were separate franchises and require separate articles. Ravenswing 21:12, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I separated the ECHL Bulls from the article as they had no connection to the previous teams, other than a name. I left the CHL Bulls in the article as there is a direct connection between defunct WHA teams being replaced by CHL or PHL teams. Flibirigit (talk) 00:51, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Records

Does anyone have this teams records? All I remember is they weren't very good, but they won just about every fight :) Onehotdog93 (talk) 22:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]