Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Summerslam 2010
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
- 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 redirect to SummerSlam until the event becomes closer. Regards, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 14:32, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Summerslam 2010 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable per WP:ROUTINE. TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 16:14, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to SummerSlam. Too early for such an article to be started. -- Θakster 18:36, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Concur with that refinement. — TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 19:15, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:22, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Event is close at hand, reliable references exist to sustain notability at this time. --WillC 03:52, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Is deleting this article for 3 weeks all that necessary? This afd is a waste of time for myself and all other users commenting on this. If you absolutely have to delete this blemish on Wikipedia, at least userify it so when it does become 'relevant' in 3 weeks it can simply be reinstated. If this was Summerslam 2011 I'd understand, but not this. Vodello (talk) 20:10, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- redirect to summerslam. If reliable sources exist to sustain notability, please provide them. The article doens't have any. In fact, the article is just generic information that is applicable to all such summerslam events aside from the date. I had a look and there does not appear to be much reporting about the event. With a redirect, the article can easily be resurrected when there is actual information. -- Whpq (talk) 20:29, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect Per Oakster SuperSilver901 22:50, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect Enough said. Mal Case (talk) 07:47, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Will Mattspactalk 22:38, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.