Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Madison Eagles

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. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:40, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Madison Eagles[edit]

Contested prod by User:SHIMMER which by itself smacks of a WP:COI violation. Not notable. Single or two appearances at established feds only and primarily involved in a non notable promotion !! Justa Punk !! 02:45, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. —Nikki♥311 04:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Seems notable enough to me for an individual article.--WillC 05:14, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable. Majority of work is from promotions that aren't notable so why is she? WP:COI note valid per nom. Shimmer should stop promoing on Wikipedia. Mal Case (talk) 06:20, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 11:53, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 11:54, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Vanity article if the prod removal says anything. Mad Dog Dunstan (talk) 03:41, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete only one 3rd party source on her and that's Online World of Wrestling, which is not enough to prove Notability. The remaining sources confirms that she exists and that she wrestles, which is not enough to warrant a wikipedia page, you need proper Verifiability as well.MPJ-DK (talk) 17:22, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable. Orderinchaos 20:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per MPJ-DK's comment TaintedZebra (talk) 10:13, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All five of these noms are not just WP:COI candidates, they violate WP:VAIN as well. Rick Doodle (talk) 04:33, 23 June 2009 (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.