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 keep. ( non-admin closure) -- Mdann 52 talk to me! 08:03, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Pacific Xtreme Combat (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

A non notable article without any sources to assert notability. Dwanyewest ( talk) 19:35, 7 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 01:12, 8 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oceania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 01:13, 8 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 01:13, 8 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 01:13, 8 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Easy keep as it seems the nominator didn't even bother to do a simple Google News search. – H T D 04:39, 8 June 2014 (UTC) reply
• Comment Not so clear. Google hits don't imply notability - what would help are references from reliable third party sources. Right now there is nothing that confers notability. Peter Rehse ( talk) 11:20, 8 June 2014 (UTC) reply
• Keep - Number of Google hits does not imply notability, but coverage in reliable sources does. To be fair, many of the hits I found were routine press coverage, but the sheer number of such pages I found indicates that this is a notable tournament. Narutolovehinata5 ^{t c csd new} 01:28, 10 June 2014 (UTC) reply
• Comment It would be great if at least a few could be added to the article. Peter Rehse ( talk) 08:43, 10 June 2014 (UTC) reply
• Delete As of now there are no sources supplied providing significant coverage from independent reliable sources. This is basic notability stuff. There are a lot of Google hits which means there is the potential for the subject to be notable but the burden is on those asserting notability to actually provide that evidence. SQGibbon ( talk) 22:55, 12 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Delete No significant independent coverage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.212.162.5 ( talk) 21:18, 13 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Does anyone still do WP:BEFORE? I realize it became extra hard when Google News went kaput, but it is still actually quite easy. For example, searches for "PXC" gives out 191 news articles in the Philippine Daily Inquirer, 439 news articles in the Philippine Star, and 129 articles in ABS-CBN News. – H T D 09:46, 14 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Routine sports coverage does not count. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.212.162.5 ( talk) 19:21, 14 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Makes perfect sense, right? Might as well delete the "results" section of 2014 FIFA World Cup right now. LOL. – H T D 10:22, 15 June 2014 (UTC)re reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, slakr^{\  talk /} 03:01, 18 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Delete Only coverage is routine sports reporting--announcements of upcoming cards and listings of results. Comparing this to the World Cup makes no sense. 204.126.132.231 ( talk) 15:55, 24 June 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.