Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kellie Skater (2nd nomination)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Although deleting the AfD via G5 would have been appropriate before the discussion started, once it's started, it becomes less so. This discussion highlights that reason, for even though the existence of WP:SPA activity on the AfD is clear, it seems that even after negating the reasonable suspects, there's rough consensus to keep. slakr\ talk / 11:05, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kellie Skater

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Kellie Skater (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nothing has changed since the last AfD. Still fails the notability test and has done nothing that warrants this article. 203.12.30.74 (talk) 04:36, 23 April 2014 (UTC) -- completed at request of IP editor at WT:AFD by GB fan 14:49, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Harsh (talk) 14:51, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete Fails WP:ATHLETE and WP:ENTERTAINER which overules anything in WP:GNG in this case. A lot may have been written about here allegedly but do these mentions go to notability? I would say not. Doncram's statement is not relevant to this AfD as the rules are in place for IP's to nominate this article, as indicated by GB fan. BerleT (talk) 03:18, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your reasoning is incorrect. Failing WP:ATHLETE and WP:ENTERTAINER does not overrule meeting WP:GNG. "Subjects that do not meet the sport-specific criteria outlined in this guideline may still be notable if they meet the General Notability Guideline" (WP:ATHLETE). "People who meet the basic criteria may be considered notable without meeting the additional criteria below" (WP:BASIC). --Colapeninsula (talk) 11:20, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't make any sense...how can something "overrule" meeting WP:GNG? I've never seen some guideline that these things overrule some other form of general notability... Bali88 (talk) 15:52, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The coverage spoken of by another nominator appears trivial (Google search results show social media content coming up first). Finding reliable coverage seems difficult, and this places notability under question. Much of the article is unsourced, with the first section rashed with challenging tags. Reliance on Shimmer seems to press the WP:INHERIT button. Perhaps a re-direct to Shimmer Women Athletes could be an alternative. Some sources have questionable notability (I also noticed this with another nomination that I just commented on). Dragonfire X (talk) 11:53, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:45, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:45, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ya, and more added. starship.paint "YES!" 10:32, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Dragonfire X. Interviews require independent back up to prove notability, Mr Salminen, no matter how reliable the interview source is. At a glance, the others mentioned only carry results and nothing else. Notability therefore not established. What has she done that makes her notable? 1.124.85.78 (talk) 22:19, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Independent backup inserted. Notability - Shimmer Tag Team Champion - main evented Shimmer due to that. starship.paint "YES!" 10:32, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is indeed the case. However, this still appears to be a reasonable AfD, and the outcome of closing this would inevitably be to immediately open another one, so I suggest we let it run. The closing administrator can judge any issues that occur. Black Kite (talk) 00:11, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The two delete votes are suspicious, at the very least. For an account (Dragonfire X) to return to activity after 4 years away from Wikipedia and immediately gravitate to this trio of Australian wrestling deletion discussions (User:Justa Punk's m.o.) sounds like a WP:DUCK to me. I also notice that BerleT spends a disproportionately large time on Australian wrestling deletion discussions. GaryColemanFan (talk) 00:21, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless, a checkuser will confirm guilt / innocence. Please understand that abuse has taken place here by Justa Punk which explains the paranoia. starship.paint "YES!" 08:45, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
WP:WHO'SHEARDOFHER isn't a policy based argument. WP:GNG is objective, and this article passes that.LM2000 (talk) 05:22, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On the contrary, I for one, have heard of her. Also, the multitude of reliable secondary sources seems to indicate that she is in fact, notable. starship.paint "YES!" 03:51, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And who are you? Those sources you rely on only show that she exists, not that she's notable. 203.17.215.22 (talk) 05:30, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am an editor on Wikipedia, in case you didn't know. The very fact that she appears in multiple reliable secondary sources means she is notable and passes WP:GNG. The sources don't merely show that she exists, they show her wrestling internationally, challenging for championships and winning championships. What were you expecting, a source to explicitly say "Kellie Skater is notable enough to have an article on Wikipedia"? starship.paint "YES!" 06:31, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kellie_Skater_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1137967810"