Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Finlay Jr.

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. clear consensus. AfD is better than speedy for these in one respect : it lets us use G5 for recreation. DGG ( talk ) 17:45, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

David Finlay Jr.[edit]

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

Article does not appear to be notable under WP:GNG or WP:ENTERTAINER. References are not to independent secondary sources evidencing notability. Promotional article. Article creator has recently been banned indefinitely for using sock puppet accounts. Parkywiki (talk) 01:57, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:51, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:05, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:05, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:05, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – Speaking as someone browsing Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Wrestling, I'm looking at well over a dozen AFDs which are not only nearly identical, but initiated by the same editor for the exact same reason. If these articles are the product of sockpuppetry, then surely there must be a better process for that than a process such as AFD, which presumes that each little piece should be treated as if it exists in a vacuum. I'm not sure I want to offer !votes on every single last one. Many of them concern an effort to expand our coverage of notable wrestling promotions, which in past AFDs has been viewed as a rationale to !vote keep. From reading this particular article, I see a featured performer for a major wrestling promotion, which has also been seen as a rationale for keeping in the past. The main problem I saw in browsing a few of these articles was in the choice of sourcing. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 01:08, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Response I appreciate your concerns. Numerous articles were created by a blocked, sock-puppet account with much the same content. I proposed each one using AfD, not Speedy Deletion, as I felt this was the best way for those with a knowledge in this area to discuss the articles' merits. If there is a better way to propose a suite of dubious articles, I am willing to learn the process. I can only offer a view on notability as a non-wrestling expert. I arrived at these articles doing standard spell-check processes. I have no axe to grind about wrestling. But you must allow me to use cut/paste for my reasons for AfD as so many were themselves repetitive, unsubstantiated, not WP:GNG and promotional in my assessment. However, I can assure you that I checked out each reference link before proposing each article. Where others appeared to have independant, supportive citations from the sock-puppet account, I did not propose them for deletion.Parkywiki (talk) 02:07, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete does not meet the notability guidelines for wrestlers.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:12, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep its a wrestler in a major wrestling promotion and is now holding the NEVER 6-Man Openwight Championship. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.236.58.152 (talk) 11:38, 15 December 2016 (UTC) — 193.236.58.152 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Keep - The wrestler holds a championship in the world's second largest promotion and appears on internationally-broadcast pay-per-views. 88.145.196.147 (talk) 22:20, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll also note that there's no evidence that this is a promotional article. The nominator appears to have carelessly nominated multiple articles for deletion using copy-and-pasted rationale. 88.145.196.147 (talk) 22:35, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 18:14, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

'Response to comments by 88.145.196.147 and 193.236.58.152 My cut/paste approach to innumerable, near-identical and unreferenced WP:AfD articles by the same user has actually been criticised by Huon as being unnecessary, and that speedy deletion would have been more appropriate under WP:G5 for articles created by a user who has had at least 60 sock puppet accounts identified. (I note that comments recommending retention of this article have been made by two new anonymous users, both with no contributions to any other topics outside this arena.) Parkywiki (talk) 02:10, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:GNG. Back when he first won the NEVER title, I actually tried to create this article, but had to abandon it because there simply is not enough material on him in reliable sources. リボン・サルミネン (Ribbon Salminen)(ZOOM) 06:51, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 23:12, 23 December 2016 (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.