Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Twin City Smash

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 16:25, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Twin City Smash

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

Struggling to find RS that they actually played any matches. Don't believe they meet WP:NOTABILITY Gbawden (talk) 12:11, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iowa-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:12, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:12, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:12, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Non-notable semi-pro women's American football team. This is easy. A Google News Search reveals ZERO articles about this team. A Google search for "Twin City Smash" reveals 31 hits, which include this article, mirror articles of the Wikipedia article, a couple of YouTube videos, a promotion for an unrelated hamburger of the same name, and my personal favorite -- a book compiled from Wikipedia articles about sports teams in Iowa. Subject does not come close to satisfying the notability guidelines for a team (organization) per WP:ORG and WP:GNG, with significant coverage in multiple, independent, reliable source. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:43, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I nominated this one for WP:PROD back on January 18, 2011‎. The editor removed the prod with the reasoning, "this women's team is a notable team in a notable league, so you can kill the men's link if you want, but just let me improve this one." Since that time there have been three edits to the article: an "unreferenced" template, a "stub-sorting orphan" template, and the AFD template. So I'm going to say "Delete for the same reasons I PRODded it." (see Talk:Twin City Smash for old prod full template/reasoning).--Paul McDonald (talk) 19:54, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Like PMcD, you should have harpooned this one with an AfD in 2011! Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:19, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I blew it.--Paul McDonald (talk) 20:52, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Paulmcdonald: Hey, PMcD, you can make up for being a Big Old Softy in 2011 by reviewing the notability of the other teams in this league, too. It's a safe bet that several of the others, if not all of them, are likewise notability challenged per WP:ORG and WP:GNG. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:27, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If I have time I'll give it a whirl, but no promises.--Paul McDonald (talk) 23:32, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Does not appear to pass WP:GNG. I am not finding significant coverage of this team in reliable sources such as mainstream media outlets. Cbl62 (talk) 15:14, 22 August 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.