Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shazza McKenzie

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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:37, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Shazza McKenzie[edit]

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

Not enough significant coverage, looks like a resume/advertisement, possibly self-promotional. Person lacks notability. Currysteak (talk) 04:37, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 05:35, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 05:35, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 05:35, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – what counts as a reliable source for a vaudeville sport? Shrug. She does show up in several archived google news stories. I've no idea whether they are suitable sources though. Regards, RJH (talk) 18:53, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KTC (talk) 01:15, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~* Delete~~ – Just about any professional wrestler who has been around a few low level independent leagues will appear in a Google search of some kind. There are so many others that are more well known than this one that don't have a wiki article and rightfully so, I don't see why this particular one is exempt, especially considering the content is very limited. This article wouldn't be published in a written encyclopedia, so why have it here? Currysteak (talk) 03:49, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

your nomination counts as delete !vote. LibStar (talk) 08:28, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete fails WP:BIO and WP:ATH. if the only title is from "Insane Championship Wrestling " it really says something about lack of notability. LibStar (talk) 08:29, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
She's one of the only Australian pro wrestlers that has reached an internationally renowned organisation. Surely she is notable for that? I know of only three others. I would agree for it to be deleted if she didn't have the qualifier of being notable to her home wrestling scene. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.18.48.150 (talk) 06:21, 19 July 2012 (UTC) — 120.18.48.150 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:46, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Shimmer isn't really an internationally renowned organisation. Only diehard wrestling fans know about it, it isn't a mainstream promotion, doesn't have a television deal or any major press, it's on the level of the majority of independent promotions in the United States, so no appearing on a few local indie cards in America does not make her notable. That comment about her being "notable to her home wrestling scene" gives me more reason to believe that this article exists for use of promotion. Currysteak (talk) 08:28, 22 July 2012 (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.