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. Michig (talk) 06:42, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GibFootballTalk[edit]

GibFootballTalk (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)

I found nothing that shows that this corporation/website is notable. SL93 (talk) 02:22, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Subject lacks coverage in reliable sources. Meatsgains (talk) 02:59, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:40, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:41, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:41, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:41, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - no evidence of notability. GiantSnowman 07:03, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no indication this organization passes WP:NCORP. Fenix down (talk) 10:10, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:ORG. Jellyman (talk) 07:16, 25 April 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.