Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maximum Capacity: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Kayfabe11 (talk | contribs)
→‎[[Maximum Capacity]]: response to article creator
Line 16: Line 16:


okay, how long do I have to put all this together? I'm going to have to do some research.
okay, how long do I have to put all this together? I'm going to have to do some research.
::You should take as much time as you need to put together a proper article that shows this is a notable and important person. Gather your sources and do a thorough job. If he's not notable enough now, but you believe he is on the path to stardom, maybe you want to wait a little while till he gets a little closer to there. Wikipedia will still be here, I promise. If the article is deleted and later on it becomes possible to write a stronger one, you can create a new article about the topic, but it can't be pretty much the same one that was deleted, it should contain sources and proof of notability. You might want to explain on the talk page of the new article why it the subject is more notable or the article is better sourced than it was when it was deleted.
::I know this is your first article and that you are obviously a fan of this wrestler. Please don't be offended or discouraged and please contribute in other ways beyond this one article if you have the interest and inclination to do so. [[User:Newyorkbrad|Newyorkbrad]] 23:18, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:18, 26 December 2006

Maximum Capacity

Maximum Capacity (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Does not meet notability requirements. ↪Lakes (Talk) 19:09, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • lakes doesn't know wrestling if he thinks this guy should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kayfabe11 (talkcontribs)
  • Delete notability not established through reliable or verifiable sources. Metros232 19:48, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete - Maximum Capacity, Minimum Notability, based on the article so far. Am willing to reconsider if facts establishing notability are added. Newyorkbrad 00:01, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment what proof do you guys need? check out zero 1 max site http://www.zerooneusa.com/MAXaround_06.shtml — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kayfabe11 (talkcontribs)
    • Comment Yes he has worked for ZERO1-MAX. This does not mean he's notable. He hasn't held any notable championships and hasn't been a notable person in professional wrestling by any other way. You should add him to some wiki dedicated to professional wrestling, he has no place here so far. ↪Lakes (Talk) 15:46, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - as per nom... you dont even know the guys name or anything about his actual history... and as far as i can tell he hasnt had any significant impact on sport entertainment --- Paulley
Whatever info do you need? there are a lot of other wrestlers on this site that have done far less than Max, yet they stay. Tell me what needs to be done and ill get it done — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kayfabe11 (talkcontribs)
Well ok, first of all that career section needs to be wiped out and his real name should be noted at the top of the article with a breif mention of the persona.. the career section is very badly toned (which means it reads like your trying to hype up/sell this character... you need to write it like you have never heard of this person before and have no preference on him what so ever) and for the most part i dont want to know about the character i want to know about the man... when/where was he born, what did he do with his life before wrestling, where did he train, what made his position in Zero one notable... and all of this must be cited information. If you can write a true biography then the artcile should stay --- Paulley 23:01, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Appears to be a newer wrestler that isn't very notable. In response to Paulley's comments above: fixing the article is good and all, but the wrestler is still new. Not every article can just be kept on Wikipedia by cleaning it up. Encyclopedia: not a fan's guide to every wrestler new or old. RobJ1981 00:56, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete he needs a bit more experience before being listed unfortunately. NegroSuave 14:29, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

okay, how long do I have to put all this together? I'm going to have to do some research.

You should take as much time as you need to put together a proper article that shows this is a notable and important person. Gather your sources and do a thorough job. If he's not notable enough now, but you believe he is on the path to stardom, maybe you want to wait a little while till he gets a little closer to there. Wikipedia will still be here, I promise. If the article is deleted and later on it becomes possible to write a stronger one, you can create a new article about the topic, but it can't be pretty much the same one that was deleted, it should contain sources and proof of notability. You might want to explain on the talk page of the new article why it the subject is more notable or the article is better sourced than it was when it was deleted.
I know this is your first article and that you are obviously a fan of this wrestler. Please don't be offended or discouraged and please contribute in other ways beyond this one article if you have the interest and inclination to do so. Newyorkbrad 23:18, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]