Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Southeast Team Handball Conference

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. Sandstein 12:25, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Southeast Team Handball Conference

Southeast Team Handball Conference (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Search for sources to satisfy GNG or ORG found nothing. James (^talk/_contribs) 16:55, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I found a press release from the University of Alabama, but that's it. On that press release, there was a link to the team's page. The link was broken. I think that says it all. South Nashua (talk) 18:34, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep' It was the first Handball League in the USA and also important for the US Handball in gereral. @TeamHandball: wrote at my talk page that he's searching infos and update the article. I know ther aren't many online sources because the leasgue was established at the beginning of the internet. But I found some more sources: Emory University, Presbyterian College Magazine, Summer/Fall, 1997, Presbyterian College Magazine, Winter 1997-98 & Presbyterian College Magazine, Winter 2000--Malo95 (talk) 18:41, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • College PR magazines are not independent reliable sources within the meaning of GNG. James (^talk/_contribs) 18:49, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Handball-related deletion discussions. --Malo95 (talk) 09:12, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the

missfortune 02:16, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This debate has been included in the

missfortune 02:17, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This debate has been included in the

missfortune 02:18, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This debate has been included in the

missfortune 02:18, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This debate has been included in the

missfortune 02:18, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This debate has been included in the

missfortune 02:18, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

• Weak keep the college references are not independent but not actually unreliable Atlantic306 (talk) 13:46, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Non notable, no secondary coverage from independent and reliable sources, fails basic test
  WP:VERYOLD Ammarpad (talk) 13:23, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Delete No secondary coverage from independent sources. Boomer Vial^{Happy Holidays! • Contribs} 07:39, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete -- does not meet
  WP:NORG and significant RS coverage not found. Fancruft and trivia; such content belongs on the org's website, not here. K.e.coffman (talk) 23:37, 6 January 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.