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.
Note: This discussion has been included in
WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions.
• Gene93k (
talk) 02:25, 8 May 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete - No indication that this event is notable. However, GiantSnowman is right that it can't fail
WP:NFOOTBALL.
Smartyllama (
talk) 19:00, 8 May 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete - A quick search on both google and bing turned up nothing, might simply be
WP:TOOSOON, but (and I sincerely apologize if I am wrong) the worrying lack of information may make it seem like a
WP:HOAX. Either way doesn't seem suitable as an encyclopedic article for now.
Inter&anthro (
talk) 03:27, 10 May 2017 (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.
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.
Note: This discussion has been included in
WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions.
• Gene93k (
talk) 02:25, 8 May 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete - No indication that this event is notable. However, GiantSnowman is right that it can't fail
WP:NFOOTBALL.
Smartyllama (
talk) 19:00, 8 May 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete - A quick search on both google and bing turned up nothing, might simply be
WP:TOOSOON, but (and I sincerely apologize if I am wrong) the worrying lack of information may make it seem like a
WP:HOAX. Either way doesn't seem suitable as an encyclopedic article for now.
Inter&anthro (
talk) 03:27, 10 May 2017 (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.