Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wrestle RAGE


 * 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. czar 16:03, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Wrestle RAGE

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Despite my best efforts in searching for sources online, and in spite of adding disambiguating terms, I couldn't find enough significant coverage about this wrestling event series. In fact, I actually couldn't find any relevant hits at all: the hits for WrestleRAGE I could find were for completely unrelated events with the same name. Given the age of the event, it's possible offline coverage exists, and I'm willing to withdraw this nomination if such sources are found, but given Australia's media presence, it would be really weird for an event that was apparently on PPV have few, if any, hits online. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:10, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:11, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:11, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:11, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:11, 1 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment Narutolovehinata5 I suggest a back off on this one if I may. It seems you nominated only minutes after creation by a NEWBIE, admittedly though with a very likely COI.  I suggest you mentor and guide before we clobber and discourage a potential new wikipedian.  We need all we can get.  Aoziwe (talk) 12:14, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I honestly hate nominating articles for deletion, especially ones which had a lot of work put into them, or those created by new users. As much as possible, I only nominate articles for deletion if there's little chance it would survive anyway. Also, I may want to point to you Perennial proposals, where to cut a long story short, articles (with few exceptions) are not immune from being nominated for deletion no matter how new the article is. It's not biting new users: if anything, it's a way to guide them what Wikipedia's notability guidelines are, with the end goal of a better understanding of Wikipedia editing. I know it sucks, (as an article writer myself, I know the feeling of having your work deleted from the mainspace), but that's the way things go. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:42, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. Cheers.   Aoziwe (talk) 11:59, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 04:09, 9 February 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. I also can't find sources and the editor hasn't made any changes on Wikipedia at all since their new page was put up for deletion so isn't likely to add whatever detail they might have had. Mortee (talk) 16:40, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  05:59, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete, doesn't meet WP:GNG. Nikki  ♥  311   22:13, 17 February 2017 (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.