Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Woolgoolga Seahorses

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. The one "keep" does not make an actual argument for inclusion. Sandstein 10:08, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Woolgoolga Seahorses

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

Non-notable amateur rugby club. JTtheOG (talk) 18:29, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:12, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:12, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: not enough sources provided to establish a case for meeting the GNG, and it seems unlikely as per nom. Mattlore (talk) 19:21, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The nomination states this to be a rugby club. That is in error as they play rugby league and not rugby union.Fleets (talk) 07:40, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:21, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Fleets: I apologize for my honest mistake in the omission of the word. For what it's worth, I did say rugby league when I prodded the article before the tag was removed. JTtheOG (talk) 14:40, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't the one who raised an objection, JT. best, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:50, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SophisticatedSwampert ^{let's talk about that} 01:26, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fleets, I don't see the error as effecting the rationale for the nomination so I am not sure what the keep is based on. It is still a non-notable amateur rugby league club. Mattlore (talk) 20:38, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per nom. Club plays at a low-level of competition and doesn't appear to be notable. J Mo 101 (talk) 08:37, 1 July 2017 (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.