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 - Nabla (talk) 18:21, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Battrick (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

A browser-based cricket management game with less than 10,000 members and minimal to no reliable sources; of the three cited references, one is a blog, one is a dead link, and the last is a one-paragraph mention on a specialty sports management game website. I see nothing here that helps this pass WP:WEB other than its connection to Hattrick - and if that's the notability, perhaps this should be merged there instead. Tony Fox (arf!) 16:14, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly the most petty deletion I've ever seen on Wikipedia. And that's actually saying something, because I've seen some petty crap in my time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.240.65.222 (talk) 16:04, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game related deletions. MrKIA11 (talk) 16:19, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I cannot see (or indeed find) any evidence that this passes WP:WEBand there is an absence of reliable sources; although the article does cite three references on closer inspection they are 1) an announcement about an online Q&A session, 2) a blog and 3) a deadlink. At best this merits a short paragraph in Hattrick Limited nancy ^(talk) 17:45, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Appears to fail WP:WEB. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 18:45, 9 June 2008 (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.