Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WWE Global Warning Tour: Melbourne


 * 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 editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:18, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

WWE Global Warning Tour: Melbourne

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Previously deleted at least three times at AfD: Articles for deletion/WWE Global Warming Tour, Articles for deletion/WWE Global Warning Tour (2nd nomination), Articles for deletion/Global Warning Tour. WP:G4 tag was removed because sources have reported speculation that WWE may run future events under this name. That's still not enough to pass WP:EVENT. LM2000 (talk) 04:45, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions.LM2000 (talk) 04:52, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. TMGtalk 05:00, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. TMGtalk 05:00, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:02, 21 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep - The topic received substantial coverage over new events in Australia, but articles, which are used as sources in this article talk in detail about the 2002 show. The RS which covered it at that time and continue to discuss it are enough to pass WP:PERSISTENCE, being as they are not just passing mentions. -  Galatz גאליץ שיחה Talk  12:05, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete under G4. WP:PERSISTENCE does not apply because all notability for this is inherited from WWE Super Show-Down. It is not notable on it's own as previously established in previous AfD's and nothing has changed. 2001:8003:4FCA:6000:69FC:CAEB:527F:52C0 (talk) 01:59, 22 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep - as above — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pidzz (talk • contribs)
 * Note: This vote was put by the creator of the article. Addicted4517 (talk) 08:35, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Also, WP:PERX.LM2000 (talk) 10:00, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Neither of which make it an invalid vote, just one with less perceived weight than others. cinco deL3X1 ◊distænt write◊  21:17, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete The assertion made by Galatz does need to be proven and I do not believe it has been. The IP makes a valid point with regard to inherited notability, and given that there is nothing new otherwise the previous AfD's seem to prevail. But I don't think it warrants G4 deletion as this point did need to be brought here for a new consensus. Addicted4517 (talk) 08:35, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment While I think this should be deleted because it lacks individual notability, I would support including this material on a main PPV article should WWE actually bring the event back as a PPV. This was done for Starrcade, The Great American Bash and all of those TNA specials that used to be PPVs but aren't anymore. Until then, this should be salted if it ends in delete because this will be the fourth AfD to end like this.LM2000 (talk) 10:00, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Although I believe GNG has been met, why wouldn't it be able to be merged into Professional wrestling in Australia, similar to Professional wrestling in New Zealand, as there clearly is enough coverage to warrant that, no? This was the consensus reached at Articles for deletion/WWE SmackDown Road to WrestleMania 22 Tour -  Galatz גאליץ שיחה Talk  18:37, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * There's already a paragraph detailing the event at Professional wrestling in Australia, I think it would be WP:UNDUE to merge further there. LM2000 (talk) 04:27, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   18:25, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Merge - to Professional wrestling in Australia. Enough coverage to warrant inclusion in that article, but not, IMO, a separate article. Nikki♥311 21:24, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - clearly established previously as not notable multiple times and there are no new sources correcting already existing information. 150.101.89.150 (talk) 00:09, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * What part of WP:PERSISTENCE requires correcting information? -  Galatz גאליץ שיחה Talk  00:58, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete What part of "Prove it" don't you get, Galatz? No new coverage. Just rehashes of old coverage based 100 percent on Super Show-Down as the 2001:8003 IP said. 2001:44B8:802:1100:30F9:82DC:B850:D703 (talk) 05:08, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * This and the above IP's first 2 edits were to this AFD, FWIW. cinco deL3X1 ◊distænt write◊  11:38, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * You don't need to bring forward new information to prove it has lasting notability. To say it does has no basis. -  Galatz גאליץ שיחה Talk  12:48, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually you do because the only sources over this event have already been rejected in previous AfDs. Lasting notability is impossible when it's not notable to begin with. You need to show what has changed, and without - as has been pointed out - relying on Super Show Down. Addicted4517 (talk) 13:36, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * New sources, not new information. The sources that may mention a 2018 show, focus heavily on the old show, which is exactly what WP:PERSISTENCE is based on. -  Galatz גאליץ שיחה Talk  13:55, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Your opinion doesn't count! 2001:44B8:802:1100:CCE7:1129:BE05:1493 (talk) 00:18, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
 * You should note that there is just the one recent source that mentions Global Warning in the article and a generally reliable source as well in Fox Sports. However the article is clearly wrong as it speculates the name of the show, and this has since been proven wrong. You will need to provide other sources to back your assertions which at present appear to be, as the IP above me noted, an opinion by you based on Fox Sports' incorrect speculation. The mention was also passing and minor and therefore does not fulfill the criteria of WP:PERSISTENCE. As I said before, on present notes nothing has changed. You are relying on the notability of Super Show Down. Addicted4517 (talk) 03:41, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I am not making any use of that speculation. The fact that that multiple sources have discussed in detail the previous event is WP:PERSISTENCE. Not every one needs to be in the article for the sources to support notability. A Google News search, as you can see here shows dozens of RS in December 2017 and June 2018 discussing the previous event in detail. These are more than enough to meet GNG, especially when you combine it with the original sources from the time of the original event, and the build up to the event. -  Galatz גאליץ  שיחה Talk  14:48, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Each and every one of them RELY on Super Show-Down for notability! And at least one lied imputing that this is the first time WWE has been back since, which is absolutely wrong! WWE has been back every year since 2002! Global Warning would be getting NOTHING if it wasn't for Super Show-Down and that's a fact! 2001:8003:4FCA:6000:ED54:902E:C667:52D0 (talk) 00:32, 4 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete The fact that this subject has been deleted several times already is more than enough reason to delete it again, especially since the only reason it’s being talked about again after 16 years is because WWE is running an upcoming PPV that happens to be in the same country. The reason anyone at all is even mentioning Global Warning is because of Super Show Down and it has nothing to do with the actual Global Warning show itself. At best I’d suggest including this show on the Super Show Down page. OldSkool01 (talk) 12:22, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete no evidence of notability. \\\Septrillion:- &#8237;  10 Eleventeen 08:17, 6 July 2018 (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.