Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/CMLL World Lightweight Champions/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

CMLL World Lightweight Champions[edit]

the CMLL World Lightweight Champions is a professional wrestling championship promoted by the Mexican Consejo Mundial de Lucha Libre (CMLL) promotion. It was originally created as the CMLL Japan Super Lightweight Championship between 1999 and 2000 and then the CMLL World Super Lightweight Championship from 2003 to 2012. The topic includes ever wrestler who has held the championship at one point in time.

Contributor(s): MPJ-DK

All articles in this topic has actually been "Good Articles" for a while, I simply was too busy with other stuff to realize it. This topic is about the Lucha Libre, professional wrestling championship, the CMLL World Lightweight Championship and include Good Articles for the wrestlers to hold the championship to create a complete topic here. Only champions not covered do not have articles at all. There is a navigation box that unites all subjects under one and I believe this hits all the marks for a Good Topic. Note: In Mexico the championships usually do not change hands very often (current champion won it in 2016) so it is a pretty stable topic. --MPJ-DK (talk) 12:40, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - can't see any issues -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:10, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I believe that this would qualify as a featured topic. ►Cekli829 13:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Seems fine as a featured topic. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:15, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: I hate to be a spoilsport, but criterion 1(d) requires that there be "no obvious gaps (missing or low-quality articles) in the topic." If the scope is the past and present holders of the title, then it looks to me like the topic is missing articles about Masato Yakushiji and Tommy Williams. -Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 17:16, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bryanrutherford0 you are by no means a spoil sport. But that rule refers to existing articles, all written articles have to have the quality. And in this case neither individual is notable enough for their own articles. Please do double check of course, but i believe you will find that the red links do not count. In this case neither would survive n AFD. MPJ-DK (talk) 18:06, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I apologize, it does not actually mention thiz specifically, i think we will need input from GamerPro64 to comment as the topic coordinator. MPJ-DK (talk) 18:14, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Director comment - MPJ-DK is correct. If there are articles that are not notable for Wikipedia and the topic is as complete as possible then criterion 1(d) is not violated. An example of this is the Capcom Five topic. GamerPro64 02:39, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thank you I thought that was the case but could not pinpoint the specifics. In this case neither Williams nor Yakushiji are notable based on what little I can find on them, I did the research when I first worked on the main championship article. MPJ-DK (talk) 02:50, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
        • Bryanrutherford0 - Your concern has been addressed, would you care to weight in again now that the rules have been clarified? MPJ-DK (talk) 23:31, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
          • Support: I'm satisfied and changing my vote, AGF on the assertion that those two wrestlers are not notable (which I have not investigated); to be clear, the criterion is satisfied not because those articles have not been written (which would be a loony interpretation of the rule) but because those topics are not notable, and therefore encyclopedic articles about them are impossible to create. -Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 02:48, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
            • Thankyou, and I totally agree, if the subject was notable but had no article I would not think it complete either. MPJ-DK (talk) 15:42, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic - GamerPro64 20:43, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]