Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff Gaylord


 * 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 of the debate was no consensus. Disregarding from comments such as "how is being a professional wrestler notable" and the like.--Ezeu 02:54, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Jeff Gaylord
Person does not meet notability requirements ↪Lakes (Talk) 08:49, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom.--Jusjih 16:00, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand - wrestled in now-defunct USWA, once a "major" pro wrestling promotion. B.Wind 02:55, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment USWA is notable, but not every person that worked for that company is. ↪Lakes (Talk) 10:13, 31 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep I don't know much about wrestling, but the fact that all the others mentioned are blue links is a good sign. Seems to be reasonably notable. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by J Milburn (talk • contribs).
 * Delete - how is being a professional wrestler notable? Sandstein 18:15, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Sandstein. Stifle (talk) 12:05, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand. How is being someone with a two bit opinion on Wikipedia notable? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.131.77.80 (talk • contribs).
 * Delete. Fails WP:BIO. I'd like to add that the above unsigned comment really won't assist in the retention of this article, as it's the only edit from the anonymous IP. If you want to contribute to wikipedia, 4.131.77.80, a good way to do so is to create an account, make contributions and then establish a track record as an editor. I'm assuming you're not an established editor who forgot to log in, as you also forgot to sign with ~ . Further to that ... umm ... don't be rude. Colon el  Tom 13:03, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete since his most major claim to fame, being the Black Knight, doesn't seem to be verifiable. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  15:48, 7 June 2006 (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.