Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Super-team

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: already redirected to High-performance_teams per the discussion. Black Kite (talk) 19:14, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Super-team[edit]

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

appears to be a non notable business jargon neologism. Gaijin42 (talk) 16:56, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is a significant term when discussing collaboration among high ranking professionals on a project that requires high level expertise in multiple areas. Stmullin (talk) 17:48, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't. None of the sources appear to mention "super team" that I could tell. In reviewing the first cite, which appears to be someone's college term paper, it appears that most of the material in the article was copied word for word. I've deleted the article as a copyright infringement accordingly. It's been a while since I've closed an AFD, so if someone could do that for me. Kuru (talk) 02:02, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a to do list and links to existing articles. This article is not specific to one industry so can not be construed as jargon. It is a leadership concept as well as a term. 174.99.59.109 (talk) 19:05, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:48, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are no copyright infringments in the article . . . if I could ban you I most certainly would do just that. 174.99.59.109 (talk) 15:50, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

comment this article topic appears to be a duplicate subject of High-performance_teams and should probably be redirected there. ~~It qualifies for A10 imo, but as the G12 was declined by Smartse I won't renom.~~ Gaijin42 (talk) 17:13, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently A10 should not be used where a redirect is a valid result, so nm on that point, but still redirect Gaijin42 (talk) 17:26, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

REDIRECTED per https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Stmullin&diff=601232768&oldid=601232206 Gaijin42 (talk) 18:58, 25 March 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.