	This article is within the scope of WikiProject College basketball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of college basketball 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.College basketballWikipedia:WikiProject College basketballTemplate:WikiProject College basketballcollege basketball articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Deletion issues

Sorry, I jumped the gun and added speedy deletion when I saw this article. Does "The Show" deserve its own article? Very debatable...all of the (relevant, encyclopedic) info in this article could just as easily have been included in SDSU Aztecs in a short blurb. I suppose I could have just deleted everything but the intro and stubbed it. Thoughts?

--IRelayer 22:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Changed my mind.--IRelayer 22:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I saw this when it was first created, and tried to make significant changes while prompting the original author to question its validity and information content. I think it should stay as an article, and I like the recent substantial edit/reduction. More could be added, from a nuetral viewpoint, in the future. Streltzer 18:42, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Voting

DO NOT DELETE. It appears to me that the notability of this group has to do with its awareness by the basketball fan community in the SDSU Aztecs and in the Mountain West Conference communities. As shown by the CSTV article reference, the SDSU Show certainly is "notable" in the generic, dictionary sense -- it was distinguished from other groups of fans, and it is prominent in the SDSU and MWC communities. On that basis, I vote that we do NOT delete this article. Streltzer (talk) 21:42, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a vote, but I removed the Prod anyway (I was the one to Prod it in the first place). Anytime an article is Prodded (see WP:Prod) you can remove the message if you disagree and then it might go to Articles for Deletion for the discussion. The CSTV article probably doesn't pass wikipedia's standard on reliable sources, but it's possible that there are sources out there so I'm not worried about this anymore. It could possibly become an interesting article, so I have no objections anymore. Phydend (talk) 22:17, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other