Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nakkertok nordic

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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:19, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nakkertok nordic

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

Article about a ski club, referenced entirely to its own self-published content about itself with no evidence of reliable source coverage about it in media shown at all. As always, a sports organization does not get an automatic notability freebie just because its own website technically verifies that it exists -- it has to clear WP:GNG and WP:ORGDEPTH, on the back of coverage about it in sources it didn't publish itself, for a Wikipedia article to become earned. Bearcat (talk) 17:59, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Quebec-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 17:59, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:39, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:39, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

keep. I found a number of articles about the club. E.g. http://www.oua.ca/sports/nordicski/2015-16/releases/20160218ee80oh http://fasterskier.com/fsarticle/nakkertok-nordic-wins-250000-grand-prize-making-snowmaking-a-reality/ http://rotaryottawa.com/speakers/e727f104-4061-4beb-ab25-a0b8f1380474 Ross-c (talk) 18:52, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great, now try finding some articles about the club in reliable sources — exactly none of those three are any such thing at all. Bearcat (talk) 04:07, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Having revised the definition of reliable sources, my sources meet the requirements. Hence my vote stays Keep. Ross-c (talk) 11:55, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:24, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:00, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete While I did find a couple of CBC sources, I could find nothing that was not routine. Those CBC articles also lacked depth, like most of the other articles available. Gargleafg (talk) 07:57, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kirbanzo (talk) 18:10, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The RS news articles I looked at where this club was mentioned, it was only mentioned trivially, routinely or it was not the real subject of the article, like the one Gargleafg linked to where it was really about the poor snow conditions people were going to race in. Air.light (talk) 03:53, 15 May 2018 (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.