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. Sandstein 09:41, 13 October 2016 (UTC)reply
Keep, clearly notable based on the amount of coverage, which includes the
LA Times,
ESPN, and
Sports Illustrated. Given the status of this page as a stub it may be a good idea to redirect somewhere though.--
Prisencolin (
talk) 06:53, 8 October 2016 (UTC)reply
Changing to Redirect or merge, what little content there is can be covered in the Team Liquid article.--
Prisencolin (
talk) 07:40, 11 October 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete and then Redirect to Team Liquid if needed, because even the 2 links suggested above as being convincing are in fact not, simply they simply focus with the ownership of the team, what ever else is listed here is simply trivial and unconvincing PR, also focusing with what the company would say about itself therefore certainly not convincing, and it's not surprising since this is advertising.
SwisterTwistertalk 03:11, 9 October 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.