Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wrestling Giants

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 18:56, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wrestling Giants

Wrestling Giants (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Non-notable listcruft. I've already proposed it for deletion but original author has removed it, making me bring this to AfD.   oakster  TALK  21:05, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete as subjective, unreferenced and arbitrary inclusion criteria An actual article analyzing the history of "giant wrestlers" might be interesting, such as if it examined and compared historical big men in wrestling to modern day ones, looking at comparing styles, similarities in gimmicks, public reaction and in- and out-of-ring physical health issues (some of these gigantic guys have some similar health problems that most people, even other wrestlers, don't experience). Unfortunately, though, this article doesn't cut it. It's unreferenced, with a totally subjective list inclusion criteria (how giant do you have to be to be giant? JBL is really tall, does he count?) There is no attempt at putting the list in context or explaining exactly why this list of big wrestlers is any more interesting or notable than any other list of wrestlers. I suggest deletion, and then if an editor is interested maybe think about pursuing an actual written article about "giant wrestlers" using proper citations. Dugwiki 21:46, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

• Keep for Now The category is new as is the user who created it. Specifics of what defines a 'giant wrestler' can be dealt with over time as can sourcing. From the standpoint of the world of wrestling, it does provide useful biographical information. Bbagot 00:16, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

My recommendation then would be for the new editor who is looking to maintain this to copy and paste the article to his user space. He can maintain the article as a draft in his user space and not have to worry about subjectivity and referencing. Then, if the draft version is fixed up to meet some of the points mentioned in this afd thread, he could see about reappending the new and improved version. Dugwiki 17:27, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. It's listcruft that is better for a wrestling wiki. RobJ1981 00:51, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per above. Govvy 14:06, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
• delete per above. Reywas92^Talk 17:26, 21 February 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.