Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ballpark Brawl

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. MastCell ^Talk 15:57, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ballpark Brawl

Ballpark Brawl (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Contested prod. Non notable minor league wrestling promotion, no evidence of multiple independent non trivial reliable sources, article is little more than a list of results. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:54, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

• Strong Keep - Nominator has history of prodding every wrestling organization that is not WWE or TNA.TheNewMinistry 23:42, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

• Comment That's because none of them meet notability guidelines, just like this one. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 23:46, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

• Delete THere are wrestling articles about other then WWE/TNA (around the world even), they just need to be reliably sourced, like all articles need to. This is a collection of results, makes no claim to notability from either side (the fact it was held after a baseball game, or as a wrestling event), and as such, if sources are not supplied to provide notability, then I'm sorry, there shouldn't be an article on it. SirFozzie 04:42, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
• Keep All very notable workers, making this promotion semi-notable. I say keep. Also, Hackney does just delete everything that isn't to do with WWE or TNA, so his opinion seems to be biased. Kris 16:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

• Comment And just like the other member of WP:PW above, your !vote to keep totally ignores Wikipedia guidelines and the problems with the article. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 19:15, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, having notable workers does not make the promotion inherently notable. There have been many minor promotions who have attempted to use the fact that a notable indy wrestler has wrestled there but it means nothing. People are getting so hyped up over other issues they've become inclusionists to articles which don't merit them. –– Lid^(Talk) 19:36, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nominator, fails notability guidelines with no reliable third party sources. Burntsauce 16:39, 11 May 2007 (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.