Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kellie Skater (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   keep. Although deleting the AfD via G5 would have been appropriate before the discussion started, once it's started, it becomes less so. This discussion highlights that reason, for even though the existence of WP:SPA activity on the AfD is clear, it seems that even after negating the reasonable suspects, there's rough consensus to keep. slakr \ talk / 11:05, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Kellie Skater
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Nothing has changed since the last AfD. Still fails the notability test and has done nothing that warrants this article. 203.12.30.74 (talk) 04:36, 23 April 2014 (UTC) -- completed at request of IP editor at WT:AFD by GB fan 14:49, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Harsh  (talk)  14:51, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

*Delete Fails WP:ATHLETE and WP:ENTERTAINER which overules anything in WP:GNG in this case. A lot may have been written about here allegedly but do these mentions go to notability? I would say not. Doncram's statement is not relevant to this AfD as the rules are in place for IP's to nominate this article, as indicated by GB fan. BerleT (talk) 03:18, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - I see a lot written about her. I think she meets notability guidelines. Bali88 (talk) 15:19, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep as passes GNG. - →Davey 2010→ →Talk to me!→  18:35, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is one of 3 AFD noms suggested by a non-register user that GB now "helped".   I say Keep, as, for one, it is not nominated by a registered user, and I don't see who has any responsibility here, as GB fan disavows it.  Two, I see there was a first AFD in 2009, but there is no evidence that this article is the same as was rejected then.  The history of this article page doesn't go back that far.  It seems perhaps the nomination is misleading.  Why should we take this seriously? -- do  ncr  am  23:43, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment - The article deleted 26 June 2009 by after Articles for deletion/Kellie Skater is about the same person as this current article.  The responsibility for the AFD goes to  the person who nominated the article for deletion but didn't have the technical ability to create this page.  GB fan 23:59, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Your reasoning is incorrect. Failing WP:ATHLETE and WP:ENTERTAINER does not overrule meeting WP:GNG. "Subjects that do not meet the sport-specific criteria outlined in this guideline may still be notable if they meet the General Notability Guideline" (WP:ATHLETE). "People who meet the basic criteria may be considered notable without meeting the additional criteria below" (WP:BASIC). --Colapeninsula (talk) 11:20, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * That doesn't make any sense...how can something "overrule" meeting WP:GNG? I've never seen some guideline that these things overrule some other form of general notability... Bali88 (talk) 15:52, 25 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete The coverage spoken of by another nominator appears trivial (Google search results show social media content coming up first). Finding reliable coverage seems difficult, and this places notability under question. Much of the article is unsourced, with the first section rashed with challenging tags. Reliance on Shimmer seems to press the WP:INHERIT button. Perhaps a re-direct to Shimmer Women Athletes could be an alternative. Some sources have questionable notability (I also noticed this with another nomination that I just commented on). Dragonfire X (talk) 11:53, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:45, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:45, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Wrestling/2014/03/28/21564291.html http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Wrestling/2011/01/25/17024771.html リボン・サルミネン (Ribbon Salminen) (talk) 19:05, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Article is poorly written and sourced, but those can be fixed and are not reasons for deletion. There's enough coverage of her on reliable sites like Slam! Sports, Pro Wrestling Torch, Wrestleview and the Wrestling Observer to establish her notability. These two interviews should definitely be incorporated into the article:
 * Ya, and more added. starship.paint   "YES!" 10:32, 26 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete per Dragonfire X. Interviews require independent back up to prove notability, Mr Salminen, no matter how reliable the interview source is. At a glance, the others mentioned only carry results and nothing else. Notability therefore not established. What has she done that makes her notable? 1.124.85.78 (talk) 22:19, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Independent backup inserted. Notability - Shimmer Tag Team Champion - main evented Shimmer due to that. starship.paint   "YES!" 10:32, 26 April 2014 (UTC)


 * HOLD EVERYTHING This AfD was initiated by banned User:Justa Punk (see here for the admission. Let's just close it up and move on. GaryColemanFan (talk) 00:14, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
 * This is indeed the case. However, this still appears to be a reasonable AfD, and the outcome of closing this would inevitably be to immediately open another one, so I suggest we let it run.  The closing administrator can judge any issues that occur. Black Kite (talk) 00:11, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
 * The two delete votes are suspicious, at the very least. For an account (Dragonfire X) to return to activity after 4 years away from Wikipedia and immediately gravitate to this trio of Australian wrestling deletion discussions (User:Justa Punk's m.o.) sounds like a WP:DUCK to me. I also notice that BerleT spends a disproportionately large time on Australian wrestling deletion discussions. GaryColemanFan (talk) 00:21, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
 * ... which is why I suggested that one lets the closing admin sort that issue out. Though, if you have reasonable evidence of such, WP:SPI is the place to go. Black Kite (talk) 00:22, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Closing admin please note my comments in the Rionne McAvoy AfD, which also apply here. 1.124.170.156 (talk) 21:29, 25 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment: call for closure with Keep I voted "Keep" above. This is one of three AFD noms (Articles for deletion/Rionne McAvoy, Articles for deletion/Kellie Skater (2nd nomination), and Articles for deletion/Hartley Jackson} by a banned editor "helped" by editor User:GB fan who refused to take responsibility for the nomination, and it is a waste of regular editors' time.  Deleting it per the banned editor's wishes would reward the banned editor, i.e. it would feed the troll.  I call for immediate closure, which I believe is regular practice in this situation (though I am not really familiar with it), as per User:GaryColemanFan at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion,  "This can only turn out one of two ways: (1) Kept, or (2) Overturned on procedural grounds. Can we just close them now and save the hassle, please?".  I endorse that. -- do  ncr  am  01:28, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - definitely passes GNG - significant number of mentions by reliable sources slam.canoe.ca / pwtorch.com / f4wonline.com etc. Has appeared in iPPVs through SHINE. starship.paint   "YES!" 03:02, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment I am withdrawing my Delete vote above, not because I no longer believe this person is not notable, but in good faith to avoid what appears to be a paranoid witch hunt by GaryColemanFan. I will also be withdrawing my other votes and I will never edit in the Australian pro wrestling area again. Clearly if anyone votes delete in this sphere, you are a Justa Punk sock automatically and this is not true at all. BerleT (talk) 07:17, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Regardless, a checkuser will confirm guilt / innocence. Please understand that abuse has taken place here by Justa Punk which explains the paranoia. starship.paint   "YES!" 08:45, 26 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Passes WP:GNG.LM2000 (talk) 10:08, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Not Notable. Who's heard of her? 203.17.215.22 (talk) 03:32, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * WP:WHO'SHEARDOFHER isn't a policy based argument. WP:GNG is objective, and this article passes that.LM2000 (talk) 05:22, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
 * On the contrary, I for one, have heard of her. Also, the multitude of reliable secondary sources seems to indicate that she is in fact, notable. starship.paint   "YES!" 03:51, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * And who are you? Those sources you rely on only show that she exists, not that she's notable. 203.17.215.22 (talk) 05:30, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I am an editor on Wikipedia, in case you didn't know. The very fact that she appears in multiple reliable secondary sources means she is notable and passes WP:GNG. The sources don't merely show that she exists, they show her wrestling internationally, challenging for championships and winning championships. What were you expecting, a source to explicitly say "Kellie Skater is notable enough to have an article on Wikipedia"? starship.paint   "YES!" 06:31, 30 April 2014 (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.