Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pongo cricket


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 07:48, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Pongo cricket

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Contested prod. Website that does not indicate any Notability Excirial ( Contact me, Contribs ) 09:46, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fails WP:Notability and WP:Notability (web) as the website has not received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject.  The Le ft orium  10:06, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep only because notability (or rather lack thereof) is not a reason by itself to delete an article, in my opinion. It's normally a (very) string supporting reason, but by itself WP:NOTE could be used to argue for the deletion of innumerable articles. Ω (talk) 10:15, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * ps.: Now that I actually look at the page, I could probably be convinced to support a deletion if a good reason were put forward. Ω (talk) 10:15, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete non-notable, a total of 5 hits on Google, and not all of them were about this company. Ridernyc (talk) 11:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, non notable. --Dmol (talk) 11:29, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:10, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:11, 17 June 2009 (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.