Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Uganda International


 * 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. Seems like this article barely meets GNG judging by the !votes. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:59, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Uganda International

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence of notability and fails WP:GNG. MorbidEntree - (Talk to me! (っ◕‿◕)っ♥) (please reply using &#x7B;&#x7B;ping&#x7D;&#x7D;) 02:26, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. MorbidEntree - (Talk to me! (っ◕‿◕)っ♥) (please reply using &#x7B;&#x7B;ping&#x7D;&#x7D;) 02:29, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. MorbidEntree - (Talk to me! (っ◕‿◕)っ♥) (please reply using &#x7B;&#x7B;ping&#x7D;&#x7D;) 02:29, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete - This tournament is at the lowest level mentioned at the main badminton article. No additional sources or mentions ere found with a quick Google search. Tazerdadog (talk) 03:47, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
 * The 'level' of an international badminton tournament depends on the amount of money it offers in prize – lower money means lower 'level'. It has nothing to do with the notability. It just shows that the country's organizing association isn't that rich. What matters here is that it's the only BWF-sanctioned international badminton tournament organised in Uganda. BTW, quick Google search does provide healthy amount of sources – uganda international badminton. - NitinMlk (talk) 17:04, 4 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep - It is the regular and important international badminton tournaments organised in Uganda, sanctioned by BWF. I already added some sources. Poke Florentyna, KGirlTrucker81, NitinMlk Griff88, Aleenf1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stvbastian (talk • contribs) 08:22, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment: I don't think those references are all that reliable. --MorbidEntree - (Talk to me! (っ◕‿◕)っ♥) (please reply using &#x7B;&#x7B;ping&#x7D;&#x7D;) 06:06, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Here are the details of the above tournament at the Badminton World Federation's official website: 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010. - NitinMlk (talk) 16:32, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:53, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:53, 3 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep – It is the only international, BWF-sanctioned badminton tournament organised in Uganda. Badminton World Federation's official website is www.bwfbadminton.org. And to check the tournament's details, one can see the tournament calendar at BWF's official website or at its 'Fans Website'.


 * As far as WP:GNG is concerned, the tournament gets healthy coverage in the reliable independent sources, e.g. New Vision —, , , ; The Observer (Uganda) — ; Xinhua News Agency — ; China Network Television — ; Global Times — ; News24 — ; Uganda Radio Network — , , ; Bukedde —  ; O Jogo — ; ; ; , etc. - NitinMlk (talk) 16:26, 4 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep I don't understand why this was flagged. The government is clearly notable and warrants inclusion in Wikipedia. It passes WP:GNG. –seanhaley1 (talk) 23:31, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Ambox warning pn.svg— Suspicious account: Please note that the above contributor has recently created an account, rapidly made 10 edits and then started !voting on multiple AfDs, many of which don't make sense. See Special:Contributions/Seanhaley1 for their edits. There is a possibility that this is an undisclosed paid editor/canvassed editor/sockpuppet who is probably voting on multiple AfDs to hide the actual target. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 07:49, 6 October 2016 (UTC)


 * I proposed this for AfD because it doesn't seem to have any notability on it's own. Just because the governing body that oversees the tournament is notable, doe not automatically make the tournament itself notable. --MorbidEntree - (Talk to me! (っ◕‿◕)っ♥) (please reply using &#x7B;&#x7B;ping&#x7D;&#x7D;) 04:52, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep There are enough sources here to pass GNG. ~ EDDY  ( talk / contribs )~ 00:03, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Weakest Keep. All opinions that refer to GNG are using the wrong standard for our discussion. When we look at WP:N(E) and specifically WP:Routine, the standard is clearer: "Wedding announcements, sports scores, crime logs, and other items that tend to get an exemption from newsworthiness discussions should be considered routine. Routine events such as sports matches, film premieres, press conferences etc. may be better covered as part of another article, if at all." Thus, news reports of the type--"Olga Siamupangila and Chongo Mulenga have won a bronze medal in the mixed doubles of the Uganda International Badminton"--do not help us ascertain 'significant coverage' for notability. So, with that in mind, most of the sources provided do not pass WP:N(E). We need sources that go beyond routine sports coverage. Lexis had 31 hits, Newsbank had 49 hits. Of those, with some duplicates, four sources go beyond routine coverage at any point. What passed for me is that they come from diverse geographic areas (Africa and Asia) which is a positive sign of notability, see: WP:GEOSCOPE. This was difficult, but passes by the thinnest margin. AbstractIllusions (talk) 16:10, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) Re: "Routine events such as sports matches...may be better covered as part of another article..."


 * Actually, we are discussing the "another article" here. The discussion is about a tournament article, which keeps record of its 'routine events'. Had it been the AfD for a particular annual event of the above tournament, let's say 2016 Uganda International, then the above quote would've been suitable. But here we are discussing the notability of a tournament as a whole, instead of its individual matches.


 * 2) As per WP:GNG, 'Significant coverage' addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material. Around ten sources provided by me are solely dedicated to the tournament and they are discussing its various issues/details in a non-trivial way.


 * Finally, one should remember that the above tournament is sanctioned by the BWF & it provides world ranking points. In badminton, the Olympic qualification is based on the world rankings. So, as far as badminton is concerned, the above tournament is inherently notable. - NitinMlk (talk) 22:05, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I thought about this and don't find any of this convincing. I see the logic behind the points and won't push it, but for me the routine coverage standard is this: Is there details about the event itself (notable) or just about the matches in the event (non-notable)? For example, the Olympics we get coverage about the politics of selecting the location, the construction, the drug testing, the pageantry, etc. Also, the Olympics get re-reported afterward with profiles and books about the matches (hence they have lasting significance). As I noted above: only a few articles even have anything about the hosting of the event. In the end, we got to the same point just in very different ways. Skoal. AbstractIllusions (talk) 23:37, 14 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep - looking at some of the winners (Carolina Marín, for instance), this tournament clearly attracts some very good players - if not those at the peak of their career. While mention is largely routine, there are details like AbstractIllusions mentions in some news articles that could be added. Possibly rename to "Uganda International Badminton Open". Smmurphy(Talk) 16:58, 17 October 2016 (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.