Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ASD Cape Town

=[[ASD Cape Town]]=

:{{la|ASD Cape Town}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/ASD_Cape_Town Stats])

:({{Find sources|ASD Cape Town}})

I PRODded this article; the creator raised an objection on my talk page - see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AGiantSnowman&diff=534062591&oldid=534000670 this] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AGiantSnowman&diff=534065760&oldid=534064458 this] so I'm bringing it here instead. This is a football academy that has produced a handful of professional players, but there is no evidence that it is itself notable - it has not received significant, third-party coverage. GiantSnowman 09:27, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 09:30, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Weak Keep I think this article could pass WP:GNG if done right, just a quick few results on google gave me. What I find interesting is [http://www.goal.com/en-india/news/136/india/2012/10/18/3458272/brandon-is-a-very-good-player-asd-cape-town-coach] it could bring the first Indian player to the Premiership, but that can't be sure. When they are also playing exibition matches against teams like [http://www.futaa.com/football/article/asd-capetown-fall-to-deportivo-gateri-impresses Deportivo] I can see it pass GNG. Govvy (talk) 12:03, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 19:08, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 19:08, 22 January 2013 (UTC)


:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 06:03, 28 January 2013 (UTC)



:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Theopolisme (talk) 20:56, 3 February 2013 (UTC)


  • Delete - no indication of notability; playing an exhibition match is not a sign of meeting GNG. C679 23:31, 6 February 2013 (UTC)


:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TBrandley (what's up) 02:34, 10 February 2013 (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.