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 no consensus. Stifle (talk) 11:41, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Northbridge FC[edit]

Northbridge FC (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)

Contested PROD. Non-notable semi-pro club. Fails WP:GNG. Lack of independent 3rd party sources JMHamo (talk) 00:36, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. JMHamo (talk) 00:37, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The citations included are not about the club, just mention them in passing, like them getting artificial grass... JMHamo (talk) 00:58, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerlyHMSSolent)|lambast 01:16, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA1000 11:14, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Sure but it is widely cited and used in order to avoid what would otherwise be a large number of borderline cases. In any case, I would suggest that the article does satisfy WP:GNG for the two reasons I mentioned, amongst others. Macosal (talk) 03:12, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Prove that GNG is meet, because at the moment I can't see how it is... JMHamo (talk) 03:17, 8 February 2015 (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.