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. - Mailer Diablo 00:28, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haka Hackers[edit]

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

no evidence of notability, no independent sources, only three ghits [1] Xorkl000 10:54, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• also said ghits have absolutely nothing to do with the content of the article. --Xorkl000 11:05, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Those Google results aren't even for the same "Haka Hackers". Not notable. The KZA 11:06, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This article is not worthy of notice. The lack of reliable sources for this article is also a major concern here. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 12:17, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - No reliable sources, and a very weak notability. Even I have more GHits! Zouavman Le Zouave 12:36, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per nom. I would have just prodded this, myself. --Fabrictramp 18:05, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can vouch for the reliability of this page. - Bill Cullen 15th August 2007.

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.