Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Central Texas Stars

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. ·Add§hore· ^{Talk To Me!} 07:40, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Central Texas Stars

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

As far as I can tell, this was a proposed team that never came into being (according to this source at any rate). Rather unsurprisingly, I can't find any coverage in the Google News Archive, either under "Central Texas Stars" or "Central Texas Jammers". I found a passing mention of the "Central Texas Diplomats", but it's not clear whether they were active or not. Doesn't satisfy the WP:GNG. Alexrexpvt (talk) 13:20, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The league and its current teams don't look particularly notable, let alone a team that never played a game. --Bongwarrior (talk) 23:52, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 18:27, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 18:27, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:ORG, not enough coverage to meet WP:GNG.—Bagumba (talk) 20:14, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above - looks like a non-starter. Rikster2 (talk) 16:46, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete clearly fails the specific notability guidelines applicable to teams, businesses, and other organizations (WP:ORG). Easy call as sources are virtually non-existent. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:15, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete In regards to everything leading up to the team's creation, and short if it actually becoming a team, the topic does not have enough content or coverage to warrant an article. Mkdw ^talk 20:29, 27 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.