Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sudokuthon

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. Michig (talk) 09:26, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sudokuthon

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Sudokuthon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Does not assert notability and the only source is a broken link to the organization’s web page. Willy No1lakersfan (Talk - Edits) 02:13, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. ^Thanks,L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 03:04, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. ^Thanks,L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 03:04, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. ^Thanks,L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 03:04, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom - there's a news article about it [1] but it looks like it was only for 2006. The Wikipedia article was created around the same time and it looks like it was unknown if this was going to be a yearly event. However, WP:SUSTAINED shows us it was only for 2006 and fails notability. – The Grid (talk) 05:20, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails the GNG. ^Thanks,L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 11:28, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete No references in the article and my basic BEFORE (Google News, newspapers.com, JSTOR) fails to find even a single mention, let alone significant coverage. Indeed, even the official website is broken so it's difficult to prove this exists, let alone passes WP:GNG. Chetsford (talk) 14:02, 25 June 2019 (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.