Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Viperball (2nd 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 -- JForget  22:23, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

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

Lacks reliable third-party sources and does not suitably demonstrat notability. lifebaka++ 23:01, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions.  -- – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 23:44, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - 18,000 Google hits for Viperball, but I didn't see any that would be considered a reliable source in the first 100. Only 23 hits for "five down football", none of which meet WP:RS. No Google News hits. This does not preclude notability, but the burden of evidence is on the article's editors. As of now, there is no such evidence. Strikehold (talk) 00:21, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, can not find any indication that the game is notable. Can't find any reliable sources that discuss the game.  A new name 2008 (talk) 00:47, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. How in the world was this ever kept the first time around???  JBsupreme (talk) 00:49, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * It wasn't. It's just that the current content isn't close enough to the previous content to qualify for G4.  Cheers.  lifebaka++ 01:11, 16 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. Misreably fails notability. Niteshift36 (talk)


 * Delete per strikehold; checked google; not notable  Chzz  ►  15:48, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment It's interesting. It's just not notable (i.e., zero news coverage).  As far as the statement that there have been "exhibitions... conducted with college and high school players around the United States"... sorry, keep dreaming.  Mandsford (talk) 17:00, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete not notable that I can see. Looks like fun though... but "fun" does not equal "notable" for Wikipedia.  Also, only "sources" are the organization of the game itself, so it kind of has a "self-promotion" feel to it.--Paul McDonald (talk) 04:10, 17 July 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.