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 keep. clpo13_(talk) 05:04, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Asian-African-Latin American Table Tennis Invitational Tournament[edit]

Asian-African-Latin American Table Tennis Invitational Tournament (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

I don’t think this competition passes WP:NSPORT. Sourced currently to a blog. There may be in-depth coverage in Chinese or other sources but I’m not seeing it. Mccapra (talk) 20:56, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 20:56, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 20:56, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 20:56, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South America-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 20:56, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• keep. Here's a 1973 English in-depth report in the Peking Review. I am not sure how reliable it is as a source, but this was no minor event, being attended by what looks like most of the Chinese leadership. It seems likely there are more sources in Chinese, probably not many online though given when it happened.--2A00:23C8:4583:9F01:D5B7:AB98:CEF7:8F13 (talk) 21:45, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Here's it's name in Chinese for finding more sources: 亚非拉乒乓球友好邀请赛.--2A00:23C8:4583:9F01:D5B7:AB98:CEF7:8F13 (talk) 21:58, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, as there is a detailed report on it.Jackattack1597 (talk) 00:10, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The "keep" arguments are weak, mentioning few sources. More input required.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:24, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I've found an additional source. Given how long ago the event occurred, and that it is in a non-English speaking country, I think it is likely there would have been coverage at the time that is now inaccesible as it is not online. NemesisAT (talk) 22:53, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The sources in the article, taken together with the sources presented in this deletion discussion, show that the article subject likely passes WP:GNG. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 03:18, 6 November 2021 (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.