Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glen Osbourne

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 No Consensus Article will be kept by default. Recently added refs weaken the earlier delete arguments, although more should be added asap. DES (talk) 23:43, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Glen Osbourne

Glen Osbourne (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

PROD removed, non-notable wrestler, fails WP:V, WP:A and WP:BLP. Darrenhusted 00:05, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete, per nom and my original vote. Nikki311 00:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. OysterGuitarst 04:35, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per above. Note: title would make very useful redirect to Glen Osborne. Grutness...wha? 05:17, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Osbourne was a founding member of ECW and was the youngest-ever winner of the ECW World Television Championship. That in itself makes him notable. He also held many titles in the East Coast Wrestling Association. Bittenbender, 25, June, 2007. — Bittenbender (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletions. —John Vandenberg 09:55, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 10:00, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. MPJ-DK 11:40, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep This really needs citation, but I remember this wrestler, there was notability there. The article just needs better citation, also the article structure is currently in a poor state and could do with a clean up. Govvy 23:44, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. The subject is non-notable and the article itself is borderline as far as WP:BLP is concerned due to lack of inline supporting citations. Burntsauce 18:17, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep For reasons stated. DanZero 04:22, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment - though DanZero's account cannot really be described as an s.p.a. to the extent that Bittenbender's can, 22 of his first 40 edits have been objections to wrestling afds. Grutness...wha? 10:06, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
I didn't vote, I put 20 23 of them up for nomination, because they were all de-PROD-ed. The list of PRODs was on the to-do list of the talk page, as is the list of AfDs. Do you have a point John? Darrenhusted 11:34, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
I dont see the distinction you are making there; the nom is in principle considered an opinion to delete, unless the nom specifically state that it is a procedural nomination. All I am saying is that the WP:PW opinion is the main opinion being voiced on these nominations, and so far I have yet to see a WP:PW opinion that differs from the nom. I think it is something the closing admin needs to be aware of. John Vandenberg 14:39, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm not a member of WP:PW, I'm a wrestling fan doing my own "Personal" wrestling contributions here. One of the contributions is to delete some of the articles that do not belong on wikipedia to help improve the image of pro wrestling here. If you'd care to look then you'd see that I don't just vote "delete" to all wrestling AFDs, far from it - when I think they're worth saving I vote for that, plenty of people can attest to that, Hackney sure can ;). So how about you focus on the article and the problems stated about it instead of starting to attack the voters or their intentions. Look at my contribution list on my user page and tell me that I'm some guy trying to hurt the pro-wrestling articles on Wikipedia - I'm just not a blind mark who thinks all things wrestling related needs to be on Wikipedia. And please everyone else, let's just get back on topic here. MPJ-DK 12:31, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
I wasnt looking at the members list so much as the people who have been active on the talk page, add have seen the long list of wrestling articles that have been proposed there to be deleted. I am not insinuating foul play or attacking the people who are voting here. I am simply letting the closing admin know that a number of opinions on these Afds are coming from a subset of the wider Wikipedia community, and that due to discussion on the Project talk page, they probably all had already formed an opinion to delete these articles before the Afds nominations. I havent tried to save these articles because all attempts to dispute notability have been shot down. (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tony Rumble). John Vandenberg 14:39, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
You were the one who rounded these articles up in to this seperate category, making it easier to cast multiple votes. And all these pages had been discussed at WP:PW before PRODs were added (meaning that the project already felt they were not worth keeping). Is it any surprise that once they were put in to AfD that they would attract votes from those at WP:PW? I'm sure the closing admin will take this in to account, but ask yourself if these article survive who (other than WP:PW) will be tasked with improving the articles? Darrenhusted 14:49, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Many of the votes I am referring to came before I even had a chance to WP:DELSORT them onto the list of Wrestling-related deletions. Who will maintain and improve them? The creators, random IPs, the people that de-proded the articles, etc; and they are on my watchlist now too. John Vandenberg 15:39, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
As a common courtesy to the pro wrestling project many people who put wrestling articles up for AFD list them on the main page, so that those who KNOW the subject can chime in on any notability that may not be shown in the article. Of course people who participate in the WRESTLING project will vote on WRESTLING related AFDs, it's just common sense - no one has solicitated "deletes" or "keeps", they're listed so that the members and others can go and voice their opinion - it's a neutral listing and as such isn't anything that needs to be "noted to the admin" because it's not telling people to go and vote a certain way just that the AFD is there in case they miss it. MPJ-DK 16:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

(unindent) See [1] and [2] for Pre-PROD discussion. Darrenhusted 16:09, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

As a member of the wrestling project, I vote on all the wrestling related deletions, because that is information that I am familiar with. I don't vote with the project and nobody solicitated my vote. I vote based on my own opinions. Also, I regularly check the "wrestling related deletions" (that John V. puts articles under) and vote on articles that the wrestling project may not even know are up for AfD. None of the recent articles listed for deletion IMO are notable enough to warrant an article (and that is my opinion based on looking over the articles in question). Furthermore, I don't always vote delete...if I think an article deserves to stick around, I vote keep (for example the Martha Hart article that was recently up for AfD). I'd prefer you not question my voting record or accuse the project of vote stacking, because we are not guilty of either. Nikki311 17:57, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
One more thing. Goovy is a member of WP:PW and he voted "weak keep". At the project's talk page we indicate that articles are up for AfD and let the individual members decide whether or not they are worth saving. Nikki311 17:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Comment My nickname is spelt Govvy and I am no longer a part of the project. Also, the article hasn't been improved at all. Not a good sign. Govvy 15:02, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Sorry. I didn't know you had left. Sad. :( Nikki311 05:22, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Comment This is close to getting closed or relisted, but I'm a bit disappointed in how off-topic this discussion has meandered. It's wandered into a debate on whether WP:PW is guilty of block voting with next to no debate on the article itself. Morgan Wick 07:48, 4 July 2007 (UTC) Comment, Five deletes, two keeps (one by an SPA, another by an editor with few edits outside of AfDs), what is left to debate? The article has not been greatly improved. Darrenhusted 13:38, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Comment I have cleaned up the article, added three citations to help support this wrestler. It's not perfect, but helps support him, the wins of the ECW and ECWA belts with citation support helps for a pass on WP:BIO Athlete. Article could still do with more work. Govvy 13:52, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, I've changed my vote from before. While, the article still needs some more cleaning up and could do with some more sources, it has been worked on. I now think maybe Osbourne is notable enough to keep. He did win the ECW Television Championship (the youngest winner in the history of the title) and held it for about 5 months. Nikki311 19:06, 4 July 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.