Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RAW Family Reunion

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 delete. —Cryptic 00:18, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RAW Family Reunion[edit]

This is purely fancruft. The event was just the season premiere of Raw (which happens every year). This isn't a wrestling wiki that needs to list every season premiere and/or 3 hour edition of Raw. It also should be noted: the results of this are already at WWE Homecoming, since this is the 2nd year a Raw event like this has happened. There is no need for redundant pages. RobJ1981 03:33, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Wikipedia is not a TV listing. Sr13 03:37, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This is still a supercard in the sense that it combined the three brands together. If this was a special three-hour edition with all-Raw talent, then it wouldn't be too notable. kelvSYC 03:39, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - This is just an episode of Raw, despite feature wrestlers from SmackDown and ECW. It does not need it's own article. -- DiegoTehMexican 03:43, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep-This show has debuted the new theme for raw, its kicked off the Champion of Champions storyline, and it presented a new look for RAW. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Killswitch Engage (talk • contribs)
  • Delete Every new episode with a new name does not need a article. If it was an annual occurrence it would be worth the mention, but it's not. Mention it on the WWE RAW article and forget about it. — Moe 04:00, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and redirect to WWE Homecoming, as the content of this page is redundant, but the name is possible as a search term. Alba 04:06, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I wouldn't merge it with WWE Homecoming as all Homecoming was was the 2005 season premiere, not the general name for all of RAW's season premiere's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dubhagan (talk • contribs) 22:51, 9 October 2006
  • Delete Anything notable coming out of this show belongs on the RAW page. It's not enough for it's own page. Personally, someone should put WWE Homecoming up for deletion too, as it should basically be a note on WWE RAW too. James Duggan 05:18, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Additional comment Why should each special edition of RAW have it's own article when each edition of SNME doesn't. Heck, even with PPV's, the 2006 edition of Backlash is part of a larger Backlash article. --James Duggan 19:38, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge and redirect to WWE Homecoming. --- RockMFR 05:24, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. TJ Spyke 05:53, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; markcruft. - Chadbryant 07:14, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete we already have three times more wrestlecruft than any sane person could want to read. Guy 07:29, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Guy :-) Really, what is it with wrestling and Wikipedia? Sandstein 07:51, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, and I'm pretty sure this article was previously deleted under a different name. Cornerbock 13:56, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Since wrestling is one of a few topics disproportionately represented on Wikipedia to the point of cruft, as opposed to more notable topics like history, and people seem to want to cover wrestling even more than what's already represented, and the system for marking results of matches is cool but also cruft even if it's on WrestleMania III, might I suggest rejuvenating the Pro Wrestling Wikia? Oh wait, that's right, moving cruft off to a Wikia is marginalizing it, when everyone knows the whole world should see it on Wikipedia - never mind that that's precisely why I'm proposing marginalizing it, because no one cares. (This is not a vote, I'm just suggesting what to do with wrestlecruft in general, especially since this debate seems to be leaning delete.) Morgan Wick 16:52, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: I agree with the notion that pro wrestling is extremely disproportionately represented on Wikipedia, especially considering its fictional nature. 19:03, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. There's no assertion of notability - it's just another overhyped wrestling event. --Jtalledo (talk) 19:03, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Wrestling isn't even a real sport anymore.--HalfShadow 19:05, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete There is a WWE Raw article for a reason and that is things related to RAW, like this. --Maelnuneb (Talk) 19:14, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep As you can see on WWE PPV, all SuperCards have their own articles.
    • Comment, yeah, but, with the exception of Homecoming and this article, none of them are associated with a specific brand. James Duggan 03:59, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Comment Technically, that is not correct. WWE New Year's Revolution, Backlash, Vengeance, Unforgiven, and WWE Cyber Sunday are specific to RAW. No Way Out, Judgment Day, The Great American Bash, No Mercy, and Armageddon are specific to SmackDown!. One Night Stand and December to Dismember are specific to ECW. --Roninbk t c e # 11:32, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • Comment Those are PPV's, not actual episodes of RAW, SD, or ECW. There's a difference. James Duggan 01:43, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
          • You said "none of them are associated with a specific brand". Now you are defining "them" to be episodes of RAW, SD, or ECW. Since Family Reunion, which included wrestlers from all three brands, does not fall under your definition (so "association with a single brand" is not defined by what wrestlers are included), it seems to me that your definition is structured to either render your point always true or to confuse people. How can "they" be episodes of RAW, SD, or ECW, and not be associated with a specific brand (or show, as it now seems you meant here)? Care to clarify the point you were trying to make? Because I don't see the difference between Family Reunion and the Guerrero tributes or other very special episodes of RAW. (If you had said "cable/broadcast television shows" it would be a lot clearer, though not completely, because Saturday Night's Main Event isn't an "actual episode of RAW, SD, or ECW" either.) Morgan Wick 23:45, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
          • PPVs are considered Supercards. The assertion was that all Supercards have articles. You countered that Supercards are not associated with a specific brand. I proved that statement to be false. Unless that was not your assertion, in which case you should clarify, as Morgan Wick indicated. --Roninbk t c e # 06:32, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
            • Sorry, not thinking clearly. All this show was was a season premiere of RAW that just happened to feature wrestlers from the other brands. It was more a special edition of RAW than a supercard. Supercards are basically specials like SNME that occur once in a while. But even then, not each SNME episode has it's own article, it's all in one SNME article, same with the non-major PPV's. Each edition of Backlash doesn't have it's own article, they are all in one Backlash article. So why should special episodes of RAW have their own articles when the last SNME isn't by itself or the 2006 Backlash PPV doesn't have it's own article? James Duggan 19:33, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Arbusto 00:43, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Get to work on the deletion of the Eddie Guerrero Tribute Page, WWE Homecoming, and Tribute to the Troops if you delete this page.
  • Comment Homecoming is up for deletion as well, and I'm contemplating putting the others up for deletion, though the Tribute to the Troops has been an annual occurrence. James Duggan 03:56, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep this, it seems that it is going to be an annual thing, like Tribute to the troops, I also agree with the keep above me, if you delete this...then delete the Eddie Tribute, WWE Homecoming, and Tribute to the Troops... I vote Keep because it was a point in history in Professional Wrestling and the WWE....Starting the Champion of Champions Storyline.
    • Comment RAW X, RAW is Owen and Homecoming are up for deletion as well. The Eddie Tribute is actually part of a larger article. Tribute to the Troops I will probably put up for deletion as well once I figure out how it should be divided. They are all mostly results, which is really pointless. James Duggan 21:30, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. -- fhb3 08:20, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Leor Natanov 14:32, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Although listing all results of weekly wrestling TV shows is overboard, major cards and unique events like this one, WWE Homecoming, the Eddie Guerrero tributes and RAW is Owen ought to have their own articles. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 15:35, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I agree, this is obviously going to be an annual event, and should therefore be kept like all the others. Merge it with WWE Homecoming and update it every year, or get rid of the Troops show and any other special show. --72.74.18.111 20:20, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Delete This episode may be a little different than a usual ep of RAW, but it is not notable enough for its own article. And you know what, delete all the crufty ones like the tribute shows and troops shows too, they can easily be condensed as footnotes in a RAW article. Tony fanta 18:18, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. -- bulletproof 3:16 23:57, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Just as reputable as other special editions of RAW. ABricker 00:16, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and contain the spread of wrestlecruft. -Kubigula (ave) 15:37, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Pretty notable, could do with keeping it. Kingfisherswift 15:45, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Aaru Bui DII 10:06, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This is an important supercard in RAW and the WWE. Rhys 49 11:23, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I would not merge, as precedent suggests that the name reigns supreme. WWE Cyber Sunday is basically a continuation of the Taboo Tuesday concept, but it has a separate article. I'm sure, if pressed, there would be others. Morgan Wick 09:02, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I should also point out that the article for WWE Homecoming was deleted just recently, so I think by that precedent, this should go be default. Tony fanta 18:06, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or Merge - Annual event and Homecoming has an article. Clay4president 19:17, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Um, Homecoming has been deleted. --James Duggan 22:46, 17 October 2006 (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/RAW_Family_Reunion&oldid=1136108805"