Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/247Sports.com
Weak delete'', though I'm genuinely torn. Of the 7 sources currently provided, the first three use information provided ''by'' the subject, they are not ''about'' the subject, certainly not significant coverage. The last is from the subject itself, so obviously not independent. Of the three that remain, two are from the same source (Sports Business Daily), considered one source for the purposes of notability and the other (Sports Illustrated) is written by someone who works for the subject and ends with a promotional link to the subject site. Really, the only sources that would be considered independent and significant coverage of the subject would be the two from the same writer at the Sports Business Daily, still considered one source. That's not multiple, secondary  in my book. I was able to find http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/news/2013/05/14/247sports-partners-with-cbssportscom.html this article from the Nashville Business Journal, though it basically just confirms what is in the SBD and that's a little "one event" for me. But I'll say this - it won't take much to convince me. One more decent |RS that gives significant coverage to the subject (preferably ''not'' about the CBS deal) and we'll be there I reckon
— [[User: Stalwart111|'''Stalwart''']][[User talk:Stalwart111|'''111''']], 04:28, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:RS||WP:RS (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)