Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Myers


 * 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 Keep. &mdash; Scientizzle 23:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Brian Myers

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Contested prod. Non notable wrestler, no evidence of multiple independent non-trivial reliable sources, fails WP:BIO One Night In Hackney 303 02:43, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

He is now an ECW superstar. This should stay. Why is this up for deletion but his partners page is not. If one stays so should the other.68.161.137.141 13:54, 2 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep "Superstar" is a bit strong but he is a visible performer for the world's biggest company. ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 18:11, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment "The world's biggest company"? Errr.... —  irides centi   (talk to me!)  20:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Sorry. For anyone who didn't realise that I was referring to a wrestling company as part of this AFD on a wrestler who is an employee of a wrestling company and the subject of a wrestling-related article, I meant to say world's biggest wrestling company. I apologise wholeheartedly for any confusion. ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 22:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment So by that argument, anyone working for McDonald's is notable enough for an article? One Night In Hackney 303 23:12, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Active performer on ECW. It does need some work but that shouldn't be hard to do. 60.226.158.198 03:30, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Had a big win over the New Breed this past Tuesday on ECW just to add to that. Rick Doodle 02:02, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep As stated above, they're now a regular part of the ECW brand. --CWSensation 06:24, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep on ECW with a big win recently MPJ-DK 10:22, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep As very often One Night in Hackney doesn't do any research, he just loves to search for stuff to delete! :/ unfortunately a wrestling star who wins in the WWE is normally on the roster for a few months and will get noticed. Having just won makes it very noticeable and will no doubt have a good push that will increase world wide notability. Govvy 23:08, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I did research and there is no evidence of multiple independent non trivial reliable sources. In fact not one of the people saying keep has produced a single source to verify anything in the article, so I'd suggest they might want to do it now?  One Night In Hackney 303 23:11, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment It's not that hard to find some bits, , . It's not major, but it shows notability, and again, winning in WWE gets you a run. So you shouldn't be prodding this, but sticking it on your watch list. Govvy 23:44, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Perhaps I should put all the other articles I've just found on there as well? Like The Major Brothers and The Majors Brothers and Matt Cardona. I definitely think one article could be a good idea, but four is pushing it somewhat. One Night In Hackney 303 23:47, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge with those article ONIH. For now there is no reason for them to have seperate articles (the same reason both of The Highlanders share an article). TJ Spyke 23:53, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I've no problem withdrawing the nomination if the merge is going ahead. One Night In Hackney 303 23:59, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment ye four is a bit much, but I still prefer if we had separate wrestler articles, because we might be able to find some independent stuff. Govvy 00:11, 5 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom, fails to provide anything in the way of reliable sources. As far as I know, the biggest company is Wal-Mart, but working there doesn't make you notable by association. RFerreira 07:09, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * What I think he meant is that wrestlers in WWE should be considered automatically notable the same way anybody competing in the NBA/NFL/NHL/etc. are considered automatically notable. I have merged the two tag team articles into Major Brothers, and for now that is where the individual two should be merged as well. There isn't really enough to justify giving them individual articles yet since they have had only 1 match on TV so far (this week). TJ Spyke 06:48, 6 May 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.