Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eslövs AI

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. Sandstein 08:08, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Eslövs AI[edit]

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

Fails Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). I'm unable to locate any acceptable sources under the WP:CORPDEPTH criterion. - TheMagnificentist 15:12, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MassiveYR ♠ 15:15, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. MassiveYR ♠ 15:15, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. MassiveYR ♠ 15:15, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep in this case given they have participated in the highest level of competition there and this is something that is not quite going to qualify for WP:CORP itself, but instead WP:Notability (sports). I'm never one to suggest we accept genuinely unacceptable content at all but this isn't one of those cases. SwisterTwister talk 04:28, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- SwisterTwister, quote WP:Notability (sports) "This guideline does not cover sports teams. For guidance, please see Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)." - TheMagnificentist 04:51, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Eslöv is the dominating club in Sweden, having won the Swedish championships almost every year the last decade. I find a wealth of sources in Swedish when I do a quick search. I have added a couple of them to the article. /Julle (talk) 00:27, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Seems to be notable in Swedish circles. A stretch, but we should keep it considering the new sources that have been added.--SamHolt6 (talk) 15:33, 18 July 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.