Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarona Reiher (2nd nomination)

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 no consensus. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:58, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sarona Reiher

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Deleted fairly recently at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarona Snuka. Was persistently recreated by a banned editor; recently Bsherr (talk · contribs) asked that it be undeleted so he could fix the problems with it. Bsherr, unfortunately, did not do so; instead, Bsherr made some minor copyedits over a period of less than 20 minutes, then resubmitted. Still no indication of meeting WP:BIO or WP:ATHLETE. I've also removed all the unsourced material, which was most of it, but the sources that exist are still generally poor, many don't meet standards of WP:BLP.Jayjg ^(talk) 03:49, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There has been an intervening event since the last AfD of this subject. The subject has appeared in over twenty episodes of a notable U.S. cable television series in a major role. I added references that verify this (which Jayjg omits to mention among my improvements). The relevant notability guideline is WP:ENT, and the subject meets it. The subject is a needed article in its category, represented by the contents of Template:World Wrestling Entertainment employees. Yes, it's one of over 36,000 undersourced (but not unsourced and not unnotable) BLPs on Wikipedia. Jayjg's edits have improved the article, and the solution here is further improvement, not deletion. (Entirely irrelevant is that Jayjg blames me that WP:Wikipedia is a work in progress. I promise I'm trying to finish Wikipedia as fast as I can, and it's better for me to put articles like this in the mainspace so other editors can help.) --Bsherr (talk) 23:24, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. —Bsherr (talk) 23:30, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. —Bsherr (talk) 23:30, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no indication of meeting WP:BIO or WP:ATHLETE.--SteamIron 03:49, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If we don't decide that this should not be an article it could also be a good idea to redirect to The Usos--76.66.180.54 (talk) 04:32, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As I explained, the relevant notability guideline is WP:ENT. Could you address why this subject fails to meet that guideline? --Bsherr (talk) 17:59, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant notability guideline for a page like this is still WP:BIO and or WP:ATHLETE and I'm sorry to say it still fails WP:ENT guidelines. She hasn't had any major storyline's, hasn't won any major championships. So its still a Delete from me.--SteamIron 19:16, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If WP:ATHLETE applies, how do you explain Wikipedia:ATHLETE#Generally_acceptable_standards and its comment about professional wrestling? WP:ENT doesn't refer to storylines. --Bsherr (talk) 20:20, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It fails WP:ENT #1. Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. She hasn't had a significant role at all, no notable fueds, no noteable storylines, and No noteable championships, and she donst even meet the other two guidelines And I never said WP:ATHLETE applies here I said and or.--SteamIron 20:41, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's misleading for you to mention WP:ATHLETE, even in a disjunction, when you know it might be a frivolous argument. --Bsherr (talk) 02:06, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - She is now involved in a storyline outside of the Usos (i.e., valet to Santino) and, as has been pointed out above, has appeared in over 20 episodes of Raw. She's more notable than the vast majority of independent female wrestlers that have their own Wiki bios that aren't up for deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LucyDoo (talk • contribs) 04:21, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I refuse to accept any legitimacy of a two-day talk page discussion that apparently decided that wrestling is not to be treated as a sport. WP:ATHLETE certainly applies, but even if it didn't (which, mind you, it does), a manager/valet position in WWE is certainly a notable role. GaryColemanFan (talk) 05:35, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - No longer with The Usos and deserves a page of her own. Muur (talk) 13:12, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - She is currently involved in a storyline with Santino Marella, who is the WWE tag team Champions, and has appeared in over 24 episodes of Raw, over 5 PPV's as well as was named WWE one to watch in 2011. She is watched by over 5 million people ever week, she is more notable than the many of independent female wrestlers that have their own Wiki bios that aren't up for deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.167.196.114 (talk) 04:01, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

comment - Editors are reminded that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS should be acknowledged. Every wrestler that is consistantly n TV will have a nice number of appearces. They will also at some point be involved in a storyline. What is your guideline for a notable storyline? IMO, a notable storyline is one that a vast majority of fans will remember for a significant amount of time. i.e Rock v Austin, McMahon v Austin, McMahon v the Invasion, ect. What is your indicator of long term notability outside of the industry?. Sephiroth storm (talk) 11:03, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

comment - I also note that at this point it fails notability on the following criteria. WP:ENT Subject has not had significant roles on multiple shows. For this criteria, I am including all WWE shows under one, because the shows are not to distinguish between levels of skill. Subject does not have a large fan base or a significant "cult" following. Subject has not (from what has been mentioned here) made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment. WP:ATHLETE does not have criteria for pro wrestlers. If this criteria will be used, Project PW should submit criteria for addition. I would argue that it is unlikely that she has been the subject of review by independant, reliable sources. Having a match noted or reviewed is not suitable. (Trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may be used to support content in an article, but it is not sufficient to establish notability.) Also fails WP:BIO by definition, "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded." Every wrestler that makes it on TV for a period of time is not notable. Nothing in the above sections establishes her as different than any other wrestler. (no, not even being a second or third gen wrestler.) Sephiroth storm (talk) 11:15, 27 January 2011 (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.