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. The article's subject is found to not be notable. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 21:19, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Team Sure Win[edit]

Team Sure Win (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)

I have added citations from news articles, and media from news related agencies.--HungKami (talk) 18:06, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:CORPDEPTH and appears to be a case of WP:ADMASK. Cubbie15fan (talk) 14:47, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 15:30, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 15:30, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 15:30, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 15:30, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Team Sure Win is a brand or trade mark owned by a company. The wiki article was about the brand, which companies are operating it, in this case 2 companies from 2 countries, how it evolved, and notable entities that used or uses the brand. There are news articles, youtube videos, and other media that support some of the claims --HungKami (talk) 17:59, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Comment:I dispute the notability of the sportswear brand. Based from content of this article, Team Sure Win has only provided uniforms to teams playing "community leagues". They haven't provided uniforms for national or at least regional-wide leagues, the closest thing they have done is to provide the uniform of a Philippine Basketball Association (PBA) team. However that PBA team is an All-Star or Selection team and not a full-fledged team playing in that professional national league. Sure they had customers from multi-national companies, most probably uniforms for their corporate leagues for team building for their employees. Also the article has issues regarding its tone and structure. It looks like an advertisement for the brand. For starters, The mention of the tagline of the brand in the lead is already a red flag.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 02:49, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a criteria for how notable a sportswear brand is before it earns the right to have a page in Wikipedia? The brand has gained exposure on national Philippine television in major news programs, as well as a telemovie in Singapore. Would a national inter-government agency league be considered prominent enough? --HungKami (talk) 03:54, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mention of the brand's tagline is not as well known and as short as Nike's "Just do it", but should it catch up to global popularity before it is allowed on Wikipedia?--HungKami (talk) 04:13, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately yes. Nike's "Just do it" tagline is widely cited as the most successful taglines in the advertising industry and even has its own article (Just Do It)Hariboneagle927 (talk) 05:48, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A list of leagues where the customers have played, including one with SOTA Huskies when they played in the National School Games in Singapore.--HungKami (talk) 04:13, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of Interest - May I request Hariboneagle927 to bar himself from the deletion request discussion due to conflict of interest as he is the author of the brand's competitor, LGR. I further request to strike out his comments from this discussion, regardless of whether they bear merit or not, so as not to demean the integrity of this discussion, and avoid turning this discussion into a brand war.--HungKami (talk) 05:28, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am no way affiliated with LGR (aside from being the creator of the article), My comments are just opinions regarding the article within the WP:GNG. Such assumption is undue and is WP:APPARENTCOI. I have edited articles discussing subject matters linked to competing company/brands. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 05:44, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hariboneagle927, I respectfully withdraw my request, and trust that you will be fair. Would it be possible to re-write the tone of this article so that it merits a space in wikipedia? If so, what are your suggestions for improvement?--HungKami (talk) 06:06, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hariboneagle927, thank you for the edit on the page. It looks much better now. Should this article now be removed from the deletion candidacy and instead be upgraded for improvement?--HungKami (talk) 06:17, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes this can still improved but the article should be trimmed down, I afraid. I suggest highlighting the sportswear's most known customers (which plays in national leagues or leagues sanctioned by National Sporting Associations). The PBA Legends and involvement in the movie could be also mentioned. Community-level leagues should be at best mentioned in passing. It should be made clear regarding the nature of the multi-national companies transactions with the brand. Is it for a league within the company (usually for team building purposes), or they have a team participating in the national/regional league like in the case of all teams from the Philippine Basketball Association? The same for the government ministries/departments/agencies. Also I don't have the jurisdiction to close the deletion discussion only a third-party user. But you, me or other users can still state the rationale for keeping this article so the article would likely be kept.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 06:23, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hariboneagle927, thanks for the edits and I apologize for the earlier insinuation. I agree that some of the statements such as citations for verification, etc. But hope we can agree that this article should survive deletion? --49.149.7.22 (talk) 05:03, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't mind if this article is kept, but still you need to the convince other users who might be following this page of this article's notability. Please refer to the WP:GNG guideline which may prove helpful. Perhaps other third party links may be posted here supporting the notability of this article itself (even though they haven't integrated yet to the article)Hariboneagle927 (talk) 11:09, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Team Sure Win was created during the age of social media and was in fact instrumental in the growth of the brand. As such, most of the mentions about the brand are on Facebook. I understand stand on notability and social network, but it is what it is. Teams that play on leagues, usually just mention the team, but not who provided the uniforms. Most of the photos of the teams wearing the uniforms are also almost always on Facebook. Here are a few sites that shows the Team Sure Win uniforms:

• Proform Basketball Academy^[1] has a website which shows photos of players wearing Team Sure Win uniforms.
• English Football School^[2] has a website where you will see the students wearing the Team Sure Win uniforms.
• Videos of the Singapore tele-movie featuring the Team Sure Win uniforms. Also shown at the end-credits.^[3][4]
• News about PBA Legends in Singapore^[5][6][7][8]

--HungKami (talk) 17:41, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete for now at best as none of this currently suggests better satisfying the applicable notability guidelines. SwisterTwister talk 06:09, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notability has been established by the fact that the brand was used in international events and has gained coverage in national tv in two countries.--HungKami (talk) 06:28, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article may be tagged for improvement, but the afd tag may be removed.--HungKami (talk) 02:39, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:06, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:06, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - nothing but a few trivial mentions in independent reliable sources. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:49, 28 January 2016 (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.