Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DGUSA United We Stand


 * 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 Dragon Gate USA. This is inadequately sourced so the outcome is a clear Delete but the proposal to redirect after deletion is sound. Spartaz Humbug! 07:07, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

DGUSA United We Stand

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I can't find reliable sources which are independent to demonstrate that this is a notable event for Wikipedia to include. As I nominate this article, there are four references: one from 411mania.com (I can find no evidence that the writer of that article is anything other than a wrestling fan who has written on a few blogs); one from prowrestlinghistory.com (no evidence that this is anything other than a fan site of wrestling); one from pwtorch.com (this might be a better source, but again no evidence that it meets the WP:RS criteria); one from onlineworldofwrestling.com (which says here 'The Online World of Wrestling Website is happy (and proud) to be a website for wrestling fans and by wrestling fans. Sure we get imput from the workers themselves but really everything on the site is for you, the average mark').  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 22:25, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions.  — Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 22:31, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  —  Baseball   Watcher  22:45, 3 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Strong keep I found plenty of links with stuff to do with the subject at hand. I find it funny that you are wasting your time with an article with references when there are articles without references... But I bet if there were no references you wouldn't bother with it. The article will be re-created anyways and it's a POV when it comes to your opinion on the references.  Mr. C.C. Hey yo!I didn't do it! 00:21, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't regard it as wasting my time. The fact that it has references means nothing if those references are at sources which do not meet the reliable sources criteria. As for "if there were no references" - if there had been none at all, I would have looked for some reliable ones at independent sources; if I had found none, I would have nominated it for deletion (Articles_for_deletion/Monster_Truck_Destruction for example) - having no references or having references at sources which do not meet the criteria is the same thing. You may have "found plenty of links with stuff to do with the subject at hand" - I did too... but again, they didn't meet the reliability criteria and/or the independent criteria. If I did a search for my full name on Google, I get 7330 hits - but that does not indicate that I am notable and suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia!  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 01:04, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - The references are not reliable sources. Thus the article fails the general notability guideline by not having sufficient independent sources. Additionally, stating "the article will be recreated" is not a reason for keeping the article. If it is recreated, it can be speedily deleted per CSD G4 and salted if necessary. Reaper Eternal (talk) 00:56, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Dragon Gate USA and possibly expand the list of events with some details from this article.  Th e S te ve   07:15, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I'd have no objection to the closing admin redirecting - but I don't feel the detail needs to be expanded to what is already in that article. Personally, I think a better place for the detail in the current article would be the Pro Wrestling Wiki, as a more specialist wiki for the area  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 10:57, 4 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete then Redirect I do not think there is "significant coverage in independent reliable sources" - which is why, 30 May, I PRODded it; I explained my thoughs on my talk page, now in User talk:Chzz/Archive_32.  Chzz  ► 16:24, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment You don't actually know for sure as you said you think. So unless you know for sure, we can't go off what you think in this instance.   Mr. C.C. Hey yo!I didn't do it! 20:57, 10 June 2011 (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.