Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Air Boom (2nd nomination)


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 23:56, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Air Boom
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Lots of keepers in the previous AfD seemed to have faith that the team would eventually become notable because WWE seemed to put faith in them. WWE lost that faith and I don't believe they ever did become notable. There were also some comments about the abundance of sources, these appear to be WP:ROUTINE. LM2000 (talk) 05:38, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions.LM2000 (talk) 05:41, 6 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep - Notable as tag team champions. Nominator's rationale is not related to policy. Several members of WP:PW go through phases of nominating large quantities of article for deletion based on non-rationale like "haven't done enough", "not together long enough", and now "the company lost faith in them". Hopefully they'll get bored soon and move on to something productive. Sufficient discussion in third party sources to establish notability--while some are fairly routine, others give enough depth to warrant a Wikipedia article. GaryColemanFan (talk) 15:57, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Notability (WP:GNG) is a policy. Some keep voters at the time, who made comments opposite to those you bring up, did not make policy compliant arguments.  That they won the belts at the nadir of WWE's tag division shows little notability (Articles for deletion/Kofi Kingston and R-Truth), the routine match result sources are a staple of non-notable tag teams.LM2000 (talk) 08:47, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:05, 13 September 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - It doesn't matter how long they've been together or what they've won. It matters if the team meets WP:GNG, which they do not. The sources in the article are 100% WP:ROUTINE match results or primary (from WWE.com). If someone can prove they satisfy WP:GNG by providing sufficient reliable third party sources I would reconsider. Nikki  ♥  311   04:37, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 10:40, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep There is no reason to delete this team, they are notable since they won tag team titles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6000:5644:600:F478:BDEB:F930:5BE6 (talk) 03:16, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
 * delete winning belts doesn't make you notable they were not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:BCAA:AE40:897:8F1B:5D74:C750 (talk) 12:23, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
 * delete - 1 time tag team champs, not in the same company anymore all the info can be put on there individual pages not notable enough for their own page. Browndog91 16:48, 25 September 2016 (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.