Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Team zEx (3rd nomination)


 * 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. Daniel (talk) 00:38, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Team zEx
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

There are no reliable third-party sources for this article. As such, it fails WP:V and WP:N. (Previous AFDs resulted in deletion, and no consensus, which can be clarified now.) May or may not require a delete and salt. Randomran (talk) 23:58, 9 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletions. MrKIA11 (talk) 00:03, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete--I agree with Randomran. No notability, not even a point. Drmies (talk) 00:05, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete — no verifiable, third party sources establishing notability for organizations. However, hold the salt as the last deletion was well over a year ago (see WP:CHANCE). MuZemike  ( talk ) 01:52, 10 October 2008 (UTC)


 * No third-party resources, a really small list, stuff that makes MY editing look good... We should delete it. MKguy42192 (talk) 04:35, 10 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete as no notability through reliable sources.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:24, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as a group/organisation/club which fails the notability criteria as well as the verifiability criteria through the lack of 3rd party reliable sourcing. Jasynnash2 (talk) 11:44, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Pointiless and unverifiable. --Danie Tei (talk) 16:50, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Team zEx was one of the biggest Multi Gaming Organistations in the world at its peak and I think that to delete the wikipedia page would be a shame. Oisinjm (talk) 14:45, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. While I'll grant the second AfD is a reason not to speedy delete it under G4, this article is not improved from the version that was deleted in the first AfD. Non-verifiable, no clear indication of notability. —C.Fred (talk) 13:54, 12 October 2008 (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.