Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al Madeena Cherpulassery

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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 10:59, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Al Madeena Cherpulassery

[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)

Football club article which is unsourced and a WP:BEFORE search yields very little. Google News only has this article, which is only a trivial mention of the club. An Indian source search comes up with plenty of social media accounts for this club but nothing else other than the same trivial mention from Google News. Potentially fails WP:GNG. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:38, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football, India, and Kerala. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:39, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:41, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment/Draft The creator of the page has removed the AFD tag from the page. I searched the club with different keywords but was unable to find references. I only found one reference which is already shared by the nominator. I'm suggesting to move it to draft space only because if the club really is 24 years old then the creator of the page should have some reliable references available. FBedits (talk) 13:36, 27 March 2022 (UTC)sockstrike[reply]

Draft:Al Madeena Cherpulassery already exists. Neither version is really any better than the other. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:38, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify my stance, I oppose moving to draft unless someone can prove that the sources exist. I also suspect WP:COI/WP:UPE due to the behaviour seen here. As of typing this, two accounts have been indeffed because of their behaviour around this article. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:55, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. No Great Shaker (talk) 14:20, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - both the article creator Bobanfasil and Sharafudheenkvkavu have been blocked due to suspected sockpuppetry. -- LuK3 (Talk) 16:06, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Adding that I have confirmed the sockpuppetry, as well as blocking another sock that showed up on the page. Above, I have struck through a !vote cast by the confirmed sock of a blocked user; as far as I am aware, them showing up here was coincidence, I have no evidence to connect the two cases. Girth Summit _(blether) 11:31, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom. WP:BEFORE turns up nothing to pass GNG or football notability. nearlyevil 665 22:00, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Does not pass WP:GNG. Kpddg ^(talk ^• ^contribs) 02:34, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails GNG, does not appear to be notable at all. ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 15:48, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. Giant Snowman 19:09, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - No evidence of notability. I've found only a mention in this https://www.newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/2020/apr/20/covid-19-lockdown-puts-african-sevens-football-stars-in-a-spot-in-kerala-2132506.html news. Mommmyy (talk) 20:14, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete: Non notable Onmyway22 talk 09:12, 3 April 2022 (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.