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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:48, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Uttarakhand cricket team (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)

Delete. Breaches WP:CRYSTAL. Non-notable team. Jack | ^{talk page} 12:29, 7 January 2017 (UTC) Jack | ^{talk page} 12:29, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Jack. Mohammad Sally (talk) 13:27, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:41, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:41, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:42, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Google doesn't really bring back anything of note. No problem recreating if they do indeed compete in Ranji Trophy next season. Lugnuts ^{Precious bodily fluids} 19:06, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Lack notability. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 21:39, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. ChunnuBhai (talk) 09:54, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - No notability at the moment, but will become notable if it takes part in a recognised tournament. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:14, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Per nom. One of several Indian state sides muted to be getting first-class status in the near future. Until then, the team fails WP:CRIN. PinchHittingLeggy (talk) 23:30, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Probably somebody read the Lodha Committee report and decided that they should make an article on the state team proposed in the report. Will merit an article if the team is formed but till then let us wait. Jupitus Smart 09:06, 14 January 2017 (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.