Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Best PC Ecuador

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. Subsequent to nomination, sources have been found/added that demonstrate notability of the topic. (WP:HEY) 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:37, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Best PC Ecuador

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No references, and so cannot verify whether the team satisfies the team notability guideline in cycling notability guidelines. Moved to draft space once as undersourced, and moved back to article space without a reference. PROD then removed without providing a reference. The team does not inherit notability from one member. Its notability must be verified with a reliable source. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:50, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:50, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cycling-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:50, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ecuador-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:50, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or move back to draft at best. It exists, but there is no evidence of notability. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 04:03, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexandermcnabb: We have expanded and added a good amount of reliable sources, Seacactus 13 (talk) 04:03, 27 November 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Speedy keep Please familiarize yourself with WP:CYCLING. UCI Continental teams pass notability, which is what this is. Just because it is currently a stub and unreferenced does not mean it is non notable.--Seacactus 13 (talk) 19:47, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment to User:Seacactus 13 - Familiarize yourself with the verifiability policy. This situation is no different than an article stating, without a reference, that the subject of a biography is a lieutenant general or a senator. This is known as verifiability, not truth. How do we know that the team is a UCI Continental team? Where is the reliable source? Robert McClenon (talk) 03:35, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the recent changes, several reliable and verifying sources have been added. Seacactus 13 (talk) 04:53, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep New team, but there seems to be a ton of articles via Google, albeit in Spanish, such as this, this, this, this and this to name a few. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 20:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment to User:Lugnuts - If you can supply the reference, then the article can be kept. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:35, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Robert McClenon: - I have, they're listed in my reply, above. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:31, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - See Heymann test. It is unfortunate that the author and one other editor apparently thought that a special notability test overrides or is an exemption from verifiability. They should familiarize themselves with the verifiability policy rather than incorrectly lecturing a reviewer about a special notability guideline. But the Heymann test is passed. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:59, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agree Keep in current state, but with a nod to Robert McClenon, whose call on the original article and available English sources I would still support. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 16:50, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.