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. I see a consensus to Keep and more importantly, no support for Deletion or even Redirection. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:39, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dubai Capitals[edit]

Dubai Capitals (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

There are not enough independent citations to warrant a standalone article. Fails WP:NSPORT. Consider a deletion or redirect it to International League T20. Charlie (talk) 02:48, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Cricket, and United Arab Emirates. Charlie (talk) 02:48, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep. This is a borderline bad-faith nomination considering it was tagged as having sufficient sources. WP:BEFORE has not been followed here. StAnselm (talk) 03:09, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @StAnselm with all due respect and assuming good faith; This team is quite new, and there's a lack of in-depth citations both within and outside Wikipedia. Presently, the citations mainly focus on athletes and coaches joining the team from different places globally and according to WP:NTEAM, the notability of an athlete (or a coach) that does not imply the notability of a team or club. As it stands, the topic seems premature for Wikipedia inclusion i.e., WP:TOOSOON, though I am receptive to further information meeting WP:HEY. Charlie (talk) 05:47, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:07, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Enough coverage coming up on a simple search to suggest that there will be plenty of WP:SIGCOV with a more detailed search. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 10:45, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Although there are sufficient sources the article in its current state isn't great and I doubt that anyone would notice a redirect at this stage. It might end up getting filled out in January when the next season is apparently to be played. On available sourcing it's a keep though. Blue Square Thing (talk) 06:59, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete per nom. DJ InstaMalik (talk) 08:07, 25 November 2023 (UTC) A possible WP:SPA that solely participated in numerous AfD nominations I recently initiated, which raises significant doubts from the outset. -Charlie (talk) 07:54, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. If you are suggesting a Redirect closure, please provide a link to a target article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:22, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Looks fine to me. Plenty of coverage out there, it doesn't have to be in the article itself. Desertarun (talk) 16:05, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 03:00, 3 December 2023 (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.