Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Asian Schools Debate Championship


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 05:23, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Asian Schools Debate Championship

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I'm not sure there's much notability in this specific tournament (minuscule number of hits based on a cursory search, and very brief mentions at that) - the article as it stands now is largely rubbish anyway, with nary a citation save links to websites of schools that serve no real function. Kingoflettuce (talk) 15:19, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
 * By that I mean the citations serve no real function - the schools are great, I'd bet. Kingoflettuce (talk) 15:20, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 15:23, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 15:23, 3 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. The debate does have an extensive article on it in the Toronto Star (which is a major newspaper) as can be seen by this article Speaking Their Way To Victory. And it is reasonable to guess that it has coverage of non-english press newspapers is there too given that is bound to happen when a country wins the debate. In addition, the East is getting more Westernized given the internet and other global communication so the popularity of debates will probably increase (and the West is bound to get more Easternized due to globalization too).Knox490 (talk) 23:11, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Busker, you mean the debate competition, not the debate. Also, the so-called 'extensive' news link you cited is firstly NOT from Toronto Star, but The Star (Malaysia). Anyway it's far from extensive, more of a 'by the way' thing while trumpeting the success of so-and-so MY team. Even if it were extensive, one source simply does not suffice. The rest of your argument can be discredited for being hinged on conjecture - pray dig up some of these "non-english" coverage? A poor defence of a poorly-written article. Kingoflettuce (talk) 12:29, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 06:23, 11 March 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete: There's no significant coverage of the event. Non-notable. Macktheknifeau (talk) 15:26, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Killiondude (talk) 23:47, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete--No evidence of passage of GNG. ~ Winged Blades Godric 02:46, 26 March 2018 (UTC)


 * 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.