Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2010 ITF Women's Circuit- Hatyai

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. postdlf (talk) 18:41, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2010 ITF Women's Circuit- Hatyai

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

I have never seen such a poor article with bias. Anyway, this is for a 10 K tournament, Wikipedia, do not do these types of pages for tournaments of this value. We draw a line with the challengers and any joint woman's tournament with the challengers. We do not create articles for what is essentally a bunch of non notable people, if this article stays then we might as well do every tournament that the ITF/ATP and WTA sanction. Creating endless pages of crap. Note the user has done some good stuff with the 100k tournies, just they have gone a little OTT by doing Indian 10k tournies KnowIG (talk) 09:25, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Regardless of whether it's a poor article with bias for a tournament of non-notable people and crap, etc. etc. this is already described in 2010 ITF Women's Circuit (July–September), and it's done much better, including things like when it happened (spoiler alert: July 12) and a link to the results. There are few $10,000 tournaments that I can think of that are notable enough for their own article, just as there are few individual NFL regular season games that merit their own individual page. I don't have a problem with an article about the history of an annual ITF event in Hatyai. Mandsford 16:57, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:09, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:09, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and Merge - I have a suggestion: why do not to merge in a one single page (.... Asia tennis women Tournements ), the following pages 2009 ITF Women's Circuit- Delhi, 2009 ITF Women's Circuit- Delhi – Doubles, 2009 ITF Women's Circuit- Delhi – Singles, 2010 ITF Women's Circuit- Hatyai , 2011 ITF Women's Circuit: Mumbai . I notice that all there pages are proposed for deletion !!! The best way: Merge all the pages in one page.It is necessary to keep pages on the women sports. There is a considerable cost to the encyclopedia to eliminate its pages....Wikipedia has a serious deficit of female readers and female editors, and that is a problem, and this sort of thing doesn't help (references Wikipedia: This is a man's world, Where Are the Women in Wikipedia?. It is necessary to preserve this page and to improve it with merge with the another pages of Tennis women Tournements. Bonne chance,--Geneviève (talk) 20:04, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:58, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Keep because the article is not biased and is no worse than the last article for which the nominator said he had "never seen such a poor article with bias". Article can be re-nominated later if necessary. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:43, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete there are usually never ITF tournaments articles and I think Wikipedia doesn't have any, because the ITF tournaments are the lowest tennis tournaments. Also the prize money is only $10,000; the lowest for any tennis tournaments, even for ITF. Strong delete.--
T 17:08, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete This level of tournament is simply not notable. Even the 100k level tournaments seldom receive substantial coverage even at a local level. That said, there is clearly no bias in the article and I do not know where that assertion came from. Ravendrop 01:11, 31 March 2011 (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.