Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tactical Assault
- 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 03:55, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Tactical Assault (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:NFO and WP:NFSOURCES. I found no suitable or reliable sources or reviews to pass WP:NEXIST in a WP:BEFORE and no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. The Film Creator (talk) 01:03, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. The Film Creator (talk) 01:03, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. I found a trade review, but nothing else that I could use to establish notability. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:41, 5 June 2022 (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.