Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Best-on-best

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:58, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Best-on-best

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

This page contains no material that is not already covered in articles on articles about the Winter Olympics, or the Canada Cup/World Cup. On top of that, the title of the article, as explained in the lead, is not widely used reference to the tournaments included. None of the references listed on the page explain where that title came from, or even contain it. They are simply all references to tournaments that are covered extensively elsewhere on wikipedia (Canada Cup, 1972 Summit Series, World Cup of Hockey, Ice hockey at the Olympic Games. 18abruce (talk) 20:32, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

its a waste of space. delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.26.48.81 (talk) 23:25, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:34, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mkdw ^talk 04:17, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I have not been able to locate sources indicating that this term is a notable one frequently used, rather than an occasional phrase used by sportswriters for colour. Can anyone offer evidence that this term is sufficiently notable to form the topic of an article? isaacl (talk) 14:58, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 01:34, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran (t • c) 02:24, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a dictionary definition. -- Whpq (talk) 22:49, 29 January 2013 (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.