Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of current champions in Lucha Underground


 * 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. Mojo Hand (talk) 14:24, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

List of current champions in Lucha Underground

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Pointless duplication of material forked from Lucha Underground, redundant. Fiddle  Faddle  23:27, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:29, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:29, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:29, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:29, 5 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete I agree. There is very little that is not contained in the main article and if you removed that information from the main article the result would too small of a main article.Peter Rehse (talk) 16:37, 5 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep The article has enough citations that contribute to the article and more citations have been added, so there is no need of removing it. If you don't believe me take a look at the article yourself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.214.94.65 (talk) 18:02, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete or Merge Not enough actual content for a standalone article at this point.  Scr ★ pIron IV 18:06, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment This entire article is already contained in the Lucha Underground article. Is there a reason not to redirect this article there? Also, this looks like an article more than a list. If kept as a separate article, it might be better to rename it. Papaursa (talk) 19:57, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - with as few entries as this, the info can easily be contained within the parent article (where it is already to be found) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:24, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Not enough information to justify a standalone article. JCO312 (talk) 19:50, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - as per arguments above. Simply not enough for its own article.  Onel 5969  TT me 13:24, 11 November 2015 (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.