Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PWA Australia


 * 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. The consensus is that there are not independent reliable sources available that would be sufficient to meet the notability guideline. Paul Erik (talk) (contribs) 02:21, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

PWA Australia

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Doesn't meet WP:CORP. Nikki ♥  311   21:28, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions.  — Nikki  ♥  311   21:29, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions.  — Nikki  ♥  311   21:29, 10 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  — Nikki  ♥  311   21:31, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 18:28, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 18:28, 11 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Strong delete blatant advert. nothing in gnews. LibStar (talk) 07:08, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Without prejudice (or userfy) There are no references in the article, nor is there the evidence in this AfD to show that the topic is not notable.  Given no proof one way or the other, deletion without prejudice allows the article to be re-written from scratch.  But if requested, userfy, as the current article is well-organized and could have unreferenceable material cut, inline citations added, and spammy clauses re-written.  Unscintillating (talk) 02:29, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete I can't seem to find any suitable sources, it's mentioned on a lot of wrestling webpages but none of them are screaming "reliable source" to me. Qrsdogg (talk) 04:04, 16 May 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.