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. Cirt (talk) 10:17, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ManchVegasRollerGirls[edit]

ManchVegasRollerGirls (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Clearly promotional article about a roller derby organisation in the northeastern USA; no notability demonstrated. Declined speedy because the article claims that it's the first such organisation: that's a suitable indication assertion of importance in my eyes, but definitely not of notability. Nyttend (talk) 19:59, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It’s for Manchester NH, we can be seen here at www.manchvegasrollergirls.com Were in process of creating and maintain the page. Were the first team in NH to launch as in any state for roller derby teams are created and we were the first flowered by New Hampshire roller derby in second. What i don’t see is how within 30 seconds of creating and launching it gets flagged for removal. I noticed a few typos and hence is the one above that you mentioned in the league. You can look at other roller derby teams in nh such as new Hampshire roller derby who is the Nashua team in NH. They had the same issue with people flagging and wanting a removal. Sorry were not all perfect in wiki but were going to continue to update as needed. You all jump the gun way to quickly give people a chance to compose and get used to things before flagging and throwing hissy fits.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.147.24.249 (talkcontribs) 12:31, February 23, 2009 (UTC)

It seems to me that the originator of the article, who is no doubt also the above SPA IP editor, is the one having hissy fits, especially after their recent blocking. Regardless, this editor needs to learn to differentiate between an article's degree of notability and how well it is written. In this instance it is the notability of the subject that is in question and not the lack of gold star for spelling. It is quite feasible for an article to be flagged for deletion quite rapidly when it's blindingly obvious that the article's subject does not meet WP's notability requirements. The article's creator seems spectacularly ignorant of what is required to meet the notability standards of WP. --WebHamster 12:44, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Totally understood, were working on the refrences atm ,If you can give us some time on who we are we can surly provide something soon. --Team1up —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.147.24.249 (talk) 19:23, 24 February 2009 (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.