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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:21, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

World Match Racing Tour[edit]

World Match Racing Tour (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Highly promotional article, with extreme probability of COI (a quick look indicates more than 80% of edits are by SPA accounts), almost no references, and little indication of notability. WuhWuzDat 17:29, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose aka Keep. Agree the article is highly promotional, seems like there are several editors with links to the WMRT, but the tour is clearly notable as one of the three (from memory) sailing events sanctioned as "World" competitions by the world sailing body. I have no idea what COI or SPA are? In conclusion: the article clearly needs work but its notable so should stay. Mattlore (talk) 05:46, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
COI = Conflict of Interest (someone involved with the subject;SPA = Single Purpose Account (one created to edit only one thing - usually tied in with COI). SPAs can be sockpuppets - accounts created by one person to give an illusion of mass support (or occasionally opposition). Peridon (talk) 20:19, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, just had a look at the article - it is far more promotional now than ever with those "flash" graphics. [1] I'd be far more happy for the article to go back to looking something like that. Mattlore (talk) 05:47, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I viewed this article last month and it has certainly changed. It is one of the three World sailing events sanctioned by International Sailing Federation (I checked on their website) and I would say that definitely makes it notable. Reading through it I am not sure if it is 'highly promotional' as I guess you have to be on a team to enter the tour, but I see that it reads like an ad rather than a book in places, but that is easily rewritten. It could definitely do with more references. Images are good though, as I think they help explain the sport better.In conclusion: I agree with Mattlore the article clearly needs work but its notable and it should stay. Ivantu1(talk)17:40, 2 September 2010 (GMT)— Ivantu1 (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ ―Œ ♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣ 13:23, 8 September 2010 (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.