Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Miller (wrestler)


 * 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 as non-notable wrestler. —Doug Bell talk 12:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Mike Miller (wrestler)

 * — (View AfD)

Found while clearing out CAT:CSD. Deletion reason was -- non-notable wrestler. (another one of these...) This is not a valid speedy deletion reason, therefore I nominated this to afd. Opinions on what to do with this? No Stance —— Eagle (ask me for help) 03:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete None notable wrestler. Only 335.--M8v2 03:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Last time I checked there wasn't an arbitrary cut-off point. Professional sports people who make money doing their job are usually included, no matter what their rank. - Mgm|(talk) 11:27, 6 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete - fails WP:BIO. MER-C 06:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Clearly a professional wrestler because of the "He was ranked 335 in the list of top 500 wrestlers published in Pro Wrestling Illustrated in 2003." - Mgm|(talk) 11:27, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Two of my fraternity brothers cracked the PWI top 500 in the late 90s simply by wrestling for a few months in a low-budget local circuit in Winnipeg. There's very little method to the rankings, so I wouldn't put too much stock in them. Caknuck 19:06, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - he was near the bottom of the barrel three years ago in a niché sport. Clearly fails WP:BIO.  Should go.  On a general note, we seem to have far too many articles on wrestlers compared to, say, ballet dancers (to take another form of choreographic entertainment). Legis 15:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Mgm. Sharkface217 05:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - 335 of 500 in 2003? We already have far too much wrestle-cruft on here. And, has anybody actually read the article? It's unsourced, and has nothing to it. -Patstuarttalk 14:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. It fails WP:BIO. NeoJustin 22:08, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above reasons. -- James   Duggan  05:23, 11 December 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.