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.
Only one source. Topic is not notable. Five years from now the article is going to be pointless.
Buzzards-Watch Me Work (
talk) 02:13, 7 December 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep One ref does not equate to non-notable. Suggest the nominator withdraws this and reads
WP:BEFORE. Five years from now, 99% of articles will be pointless. So delete them too? LugnutsDick Laurent is dead 10:09, 7 December 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete team does not confer notability just because 1 or 2 team members possess it. Source and author are not clear about how this cycling team meets
WP:NOTABILITY--
Mevagiss (
talk) 12:54, 7 December 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep A simple search of the cycling press finds plenty of significant coverage:
[1],
[2],
[3],
[4],
[5],
[6],
[7], etc. Passes
WP:GNG.
Michitaro (
talk) 14:37, 7 December 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep, as
Lugnuts says, only one ref does not equate to non-notable. (if so, a million articles should be deleted)
Sander.v.Ginkel (
talk) 09:12, 8 December 2014 (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.