Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2015 WTA Finals – Rising Stars Invitational

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. JohnCD (talk) 17:51, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

2015 WTA Finals – Rising Stars Invitational

2015 WTA Finals – Rising Stars Invitational (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)

To nominate, to sure whether this article is keep or not, make consensus. 333-blue 11:22, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

• Delete this - Wikipedia Tennis Project has long established that exhibitions are usually not notable. The burden of proof lays in this particular exhibition event to show it's massively different than all the rest. It's one thing to be shown on the main page, but it's own article?.... not a chance. This was prod'd and was due to be deleted today, but it was deprod'd with no explanation. Fyunck(click) (talk) 02:01, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

• Keep – there exist IRS about contest (eg. [1], [2], osaka + RSI), so the notabilty is suitable for a stand-alone article; En Wiki has category for exhibitions > this article is no exception.--Kacir 21:44, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 01:43, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sport-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK  10:50, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK  10:51, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:30, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Delete I agree with Fyunck(click) that it is not notable to have an article of its own. Alternatively, its content might merge with main article. SOAD KoRn (talk) 19:48, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

• Delete - proposer apparently misunderstood the PROD process. The PROD for this article had expired when the article was proposed for AfD. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 01:43, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

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.