Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matrix Powertag

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. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010 • (talk) 20:35, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Matrix Powertag[edit]

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

Only one source in the entire article. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 02:18, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep That is not sufficient reason for deletion. As WP:NRVE states "Editors evaluating notability should consider not only any sources currently named in an article, but also the possibility of notability-indicating sources that are not currently named in the article. Notability requires only the existence of suitable independent, reliable sources, not their immediate citation." Since Matrix Powertag is one of the more successful cycling teams on the Asia Tour, it and its team members regularly appear in the cycling press, especially in Japan: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], etc. Easily passes WP:GNG. This seems like a case of WP:BEFORE. Michitaro (talk) 05:04, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Michitaro (talk) 05:17, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep One ref does not equate to non-notable. Suggest the nominator withdraws this and reads WP:BEFORE. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 10:07, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as Lugnuts says, only one ref does not equate to non-notable. (if so, a million articles should be deleted) Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 09:12, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:00, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:01, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cycling-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:01, 9 December 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.