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The result was Keep (withdrawn by nominator). —Wknight94 (talk) 18:52, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Porteau[edit]

Alex Porteau (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Non Notable wrestler. Darrenhusted 00:24, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletions. —Darrenhusted 00:32, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete this fellow can't be too notable if the article's author can't keep the spelling of his surname consistant throughout. Rewrite appears to establish notability. Keep Bigdaddy1981

• KEEP Wikipedia should be inclusive not exclusive. I am a firm believer that most bios should be allowed to remain. All bios need is sources and a minimal standard of notability. The larger Wikipedia is the best of a resource it is. One million articles is much better that one hundred thousand articles. It should be a source of information on the most trivial matters to the most important. Callelinea 04:01, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, so you don't like our notability criteria, no need to prove a point by trying to impose your criteria on debates where we use the actual criteria. This user has been spamming several debates with this BTW. Morgan Wick 07:38, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep * Delete KEEP For one thing, Pourteau/Porteau is used somewhat interchangably by those not familiar with the wrestler. That said, he had a run in the bigs and is an active indy name, so I say he's plenty notable for wikipedia. DanZero 04:15, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment In retrospect, Porteau isn't really *that* notable and the pro wrestling project here would be better served having detailed pages on worthy wrestlers Reckless Youth comes to mind, here - and not almost-were wrestlers.--DanZero 16:03, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yeah, the revised article is *definitely* worthy of inclusion.--DanZero 03:32, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete despite possible delusions of grandeur, appears to be nothing more than enhancement talent. CitiCat 05:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)Weak keep did appear on WWF Raw[1] (even winning a match), appears enough to keep. CitiCat 05:30, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Doesn't pass notability SirFozzie 16:23, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep In 1996-1997, he was a pushed superstar in WWF, known as "The Pug" and had his own theme song. Very notable wrestler, has been a big part of the biggest organizations. Dannycali 03:25, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep. Active with WWF, WCW, NWO. Limited roles, but counted together, probably counts as enough. -Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 05:45, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment well for a 20 year veteran the only support on this page is his official page. Darrenhusted 11:25, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I've re-written the article and added sources. Porteau is notable and, although he did not achieve much success, was a part of many of the top promotions. Including the WWF, WCW, GWF, USWA and WWC. A-Dust 23:40, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• CommentI've done a few minor tweaks to your otherwise fine edits A-Dust - mainly in regards to certain built in templates for height, weight, age, country/state flags. I also corrected your citation style to be in line with the generally accepted way of doing it (so that it repeats the same reference instead of 6 individual lines) - If you're interested in any of the edits or not sure what I did feel free to ask me on my user page and I'll be happy to help you out with your Wikipedia editing. MPJ-DK 14:13, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment provided other editors are happy with the re-write (if you want to contact them A-Dust) then I'll withdraw the nom becuase the article is drastically improved. Darrenhusted 08:55, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article is much better, I withdraw my nomination. If anyone wants to close this as a keep then I have no objections. Darrenhusted 15:34, 6 July 2007 (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.