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. I see a lot of "I like it"s and zero evidence to address the concerns of those recommending delete. I also checked out the article and I noticed there was no reliable non-trivial secondary sourcing... infact the only source was the website for the event. For those reasons I'm going to delete this article. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 06:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Paparazzi Championship Series[edit]

Paparazzi Championship Series (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - (View log)

A recent tournament that isn't very notable. As per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SmackDown! Sprint (which was a recent tournament for a title shot), the PCS article doesn't need to exist. Relevant information can be listed relevant wrestler articles (if needed). RobJ1981 00:53, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• • The SD sprint wasn't a tournamnet, it was a series of Beat the Clock natches. TJ Spyke 01:47, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. --Aaru Bui ^DII 02:49, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep ... Come on, who cares if it wasn't for a title shot, I still think it was a fun event and I'd like to see this reference of it kept up. Smoke Rulz 02:57, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep It does have slight value... Alex43223 ^{Talk | Contribs | E-mail | C} 07:05, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletions. -- SkierRMH 07:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Needs better sourcing, although the ones that exist do check out. Participants are also notable. RiseRobotRise 10:04, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It was noteable on TNA tapings, and it lasted quite a long while. The participants are also very notable, some of the best talents that TNA or RoH have to offer. TakerVersion1 11:08, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Bucketsofg 19:50, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. The PCS just ended last night, and no title shot was awarded. A trophy was handed out, that's it. Wikipedia isn't a guide to every wrestling tournament. WWE has had tournaments last for weeks before: it doesn't mean every one of them should be here. RobJ1981 20:33, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep seems to be just notable enough ~ Joe Jklin (T C) 20:35, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Delete Does not appear to meet notability standards. Soltak | Talk 22:37, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Per nom and comments above.--Sir James Paul, La gloria è a dio 00:31, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Leave this page, the tournament was memorable especially for the return of wrestling legend Bob Backlund. Talk 21:48, 15 January 2007
• Delete per nom. Most of the Keeps seem to be of the WP:ILIKEIT variety. Resolute 03:25, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I've suggested on the WikiProject Professional wrestling talk page that it would be a good idea to look at possible ways to provide some sort of episodic information on wrestling shows in general. Possibilities might range from year-in-review or month-in-review style articles to articles focussing on multi-week storylines (like this one). The hope is to find a way to provide episodic information for wrestling shows similar to episodic information for other television series, but without getting into match-by-match or show-by-show details. Whether or not this article is kept in the short term, in the long term I think it would be prudent to find some consensus on how to handle this sort of information to bring wrestling show plotlines and other television show plot lines closer together in how they are presented. Dugwiki 22:44, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh, one more thing. The reason to possibly keep would be because it is essentially a multi-episode synopsis of a notable television series. Since individual episode articles about notable television series appear to be generally accepted, you can reasonably argue that wrestling shows are essentially the same thing (only with more episodes per year). The flip side is that you might also argue that many of the episode articles for other types of television series should be deleted too. Either way, the main issue is one of being somewhat consistent in approaching how and what information about a television series to include in Wikipedia, and for wrestling shows what might eb a good, maintainable way to provide some of this sort of information. Dugwiki 22:48, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The tournament differed from standard wrestling tournaments and culminated in the TV return of Bob Backlund, amongst other things. TheDingbat 23:38, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Make a notation in Bob Backlund. The tournament does not deserve its own article. Soltak | Talk 00:34, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Delete per all of my comments on the Smackdown Sprint AfD and the reasons listed above. I also feel that this unsourced article lacks the ability to be verified as strongly as Wikipedia requires even if someone were to put in the time and effort to look for sources. -- The Hybrid 00:24, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A potential source of references would be official news articles TNA produced about the associated individual shows and PPV. I'm guessing a little digging on the TNA website would provide most of the verification you need as to what happened. Dugwiki 17:28, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep A unique event that was held for several weeks and even had the finals on a PPV and featured Bob Backlund. It justs needs better sourcing. TJ Spyke 01:47, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep I feel that this is a noteworthy artical. It would be best to keep it because they might have more than just one. Big Boss 0 14:47, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfDs don't work like that. If there had already been more than one, then that would be a good vote, but since there hasn't been it doesn't apply. It is like voting to keep some garage band because thay might make it big someday. -- The Hybrid 21:59, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak delete. Not all that notable, and can be referred to very briefly in the individual wrestler pages if necessary. --Dave. 22:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. As stated above: most of the keeps seem to be WP:ILIKEIT. Bob Backlund was a judge for the final: so what? If we listed every tournament that featured a big name as a judge (or wrestler), Wikipedia would be flooded with cruft. RobJ1981 00:41, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Non notable wrestling tournament. The WP:ILIKEIT comments don't seem to take into account encyclopedic notability, they seem to be focussing on something that may be notable to a wrestling fan. One Night In Hackney 01:14, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Fairly Notable in my Opinion. It appeared on Two Pay Per Views, as well as lasting several weeks on television. All Characters hold encyclopedic notability in their own right, and the event was pretty Unique. In fact, it was the first, and maybe last of it's kind. Pvegeta 23:58, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep It was a significant event that took up much television time and featured notable participants. This isn't "some garage band" that no one has heard of. This is a series of vignettes and matches that people are interested in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Travisfs120 (talk • contribs) 05:45, 18 January, 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep This was undoubtably talked about TNA angles done. You could also consider to the point of TNA's internet phenominom, as I'm sure if you look through Youtube files they are the most watched TNA segments. These skits will be talked about for years to come. Whenever Kevin Nash is brought up, people will remember his rise when he signed with WCW but his huge fall when he returned to WWE. However, Nash actually winning the fans back so late in his career will always be thought of. The PCS challenge specifically. And that is far, far more important that many tournaments listed. Besides, it's just plain fun! Why do you have to ruin it for others?Crispen Raw 06:11, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. As per the deletion of Smackdown Sprint, the PCS isn't that notable. Just because wrestling fans like it, doesn't mean it's notable enough for wiki. Put it on a wrestling wikipedia. Do you realize, if Wikipedia had every wrestling thing you liked on it... it would be flooded? Fact: there is other sites on the internet for information on wrestling and it's events. RobJ1981 18:42, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep This needs to be kept. It was a significant part of wrestling over the past few months. If tournaments for TNA were kept in the past, then this should stay, as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.19.3.245 (talk • contribs) 19:42, 19 January, 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep Kris Classic 20:48, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The debate is not a vote; please make recommendations on the course of action to be taken, sustained by arguments" --Aaru Bui ^DII 00:01, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I agree, although I'll point out, Aaru, that your own recommendation at the top was "Delete per nom". I fail to see much difference between that and a "Keep per above" recommendation, so you might want to follow your own advice....Dugwiki 16:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Sure thing. --Aaru Bui ^DII 08:30, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The majority of the votes to keep have been ridiculous, unfounded, and based solely in opinion. Whether or not one enjoys TNA has absolutely no basis on whether or not this article should be deleted. Further, precedent (i.e., Smackdown! Sprint) clearly indicates that this and similar articles should be removed. Soltak | Talk 00:34, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To quote one of the policies, Consensus can change. While precedent is useful, there is a larger open question of handling articles regarding episodes and stories in television shows of all types. Some editors favor greatly reducing the amount of episodic information for all shows, while others apparently want additional storyline information available for certain types of shows such as wrestling shows, soap operas and reality shows. It's possible (or at least hopeful) that in the long term a reasonable consensus can be reached on handling information for all TV series across the board, and that the consensus will be to allow some (but not all) articles about plot lines or linked-episodes for regular weekly serials.

So personally I see this afd as a short term debate. Regardless of whether or not this article is kept, in the long term we'll probably need some more thorough guidelines for handling episodes, etc. Dugwiki 17:03, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• STRONG KEEP This is nothing like the Smackdown Spirit. This is the talk of the Internet wrestling community!

Strong Keep: The reasoning for deletion is invalid. The "Smackdown Sprint" was just a series of matches to determine a number one contender. This was more of a tournament, albeit a very unusual one (which might warrant its presence alone). It was obviously more than just a storyline (like other tournaments), involved multiple pop culture and professional wrestling references, and will likely return in future years due to the positive response it has received. Clint 23:12, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: While a lot of the keep responses seem to be "I like it", some make logical cases. Likewise, several of the delete responses are either "per nom" (for a description that includes a terrible comparison, imo), as well as an argument of non-notability. Notability here seems to be very subjective, as in the majority opinion it is notable, but there are a significant number of people arguing the contrary, with no real evidence either way. I think a bigger problem is establishing what qualifies as notable and why.... Clint 23:19, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep: Keep it. It was a fun touranment and was very enjoyable to watch. It wasn't just wrestling. It was part comedy too and most wrestling fans enjoyed it, so that's all that matters right?

• Comment: Sources/References and more external links to announcements/etc. have been added.

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.