Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Yeaton

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. - Mailer Diablo 08:38, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mark Yeaton

fails WP:BIO, just a WWE timekeeper, not really all that notable, should just be kept on the WWE Roster page, only 142 unique google hits [1] Giant onehead 04:15, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Article has about as misplaced a tone of outrage as I've ever seen. - Richfife 04:23, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - his role in the "scandal" isn't major enough to warrant a separate article, particularly given that one on the entire thing already exists. BigHaz - Schreit mich an (Review me) 04:31, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. The fact that he is a timekeeper doesn't make him noteable. If he were involved in an ongoing storyline, perhaps... Stubbleboy 17:11, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete His role in the Montreal Screwjob can be summed up in one sentence, so he's not notable in that regard. Just a mention on the roster page should be sufficient.--Darren Jowalsen 21:11, 1 October 2006 (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.