Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Royal Rumble (2013)


 * 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. (non-admin closure) '''-- Cheers, Riley   Huntley ''' 02:26, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Royal Rumble (2013)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This yet to happen event fails the WP:NOT policy, it is sourced only to routine sports announcements none of which detail what will be the lasting significance of this event. It will be one of countless hundreds of televised and reported on sports events that take part on the last weekend of the year around the globe. JonnyBonesJones (talk) 08:31, 14 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep as WWE PPVs are notable. A major event, especially as this is one of WWE's "big four" PPVs which will have lasting significance. –  Richard  BB  09:35, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep has been an annual event since 1987, will happen and is as notable as every single event that has already happened.  MPJ  -US 11:28, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment While there might be a question to the pointy nature of the nomination, the nomination is not without merit, passing the notability test does not mean the article should be included in the Encyclopaedia, if for example it fails the core WP:NOT policy, while I have not had chance to look for sources not linked, currently this event would appear to fail WP:NOT to quote "Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion. For example, routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports, or celebrities is not a sufficient basis for inclusion in the encyclopedia. at the moment this is sourced to only just such sources so can some one please demonstrate that this event has received more than routine news reporting, otherwise it should be deleted or redirected until such time as it does.  Mt  king (edits) 21:36, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2012 November 14.  Snotbot   t &bull; c &raquo;  21:41, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. -- Cheers,  Riley   Huntley  14:38, 15 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep while the December or February PPVs might not happen it is guaranteed that barring any Mayan problems this event is happening and after Sunday the WWE will begin building up to this event. Darrenhusted (talk) 14:12, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep A Big Four WWE PPV must remain until further updates are announced up until the day before the event. (Hansen Sebastian 15:30, 16 November 2012 (UTC))
 * Keep, obviously. Another passive-aggressive nomination by someone who wants to feel important. History dictates that all WWE pay-per-views are notable, this one especially because a legitimate film star has been confirmed to perform since July. EDIT: Ah, JonnyBonesJones and Mtking are UFC enthusiasts, and almost all their edits are in that area. Clear agenda-driven nomination, given the well-established rivalry between WWE and UFC, and indeed the fans of those promotions. أنا أحبك (talk) 04:38, 20 November 2012 (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.