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. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-13 22:23Z

WWE Legends[edit]

unsourced list that has been a constant source of vandalis and POV. The list itself really isn't that notable. -- Scorpion 15:21, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: "legends contract" is mentioned in the text. If such a specific contract exists, then the article would some value. --Soman 15:30, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, the list is based on wrestlers who have signed "legends contracts" which basically means they can appear on WWE programming whenever they want and action figures of them are made. But, there is no source. -- Scorpion 15:32, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep if Delete unless a source for this can be found. Since there's hard-and-fast criteria to get on this list (signing a "legends" contract), it's not "indiscriminate". All of these wrestlers are notable and indeed legends in the business. However, all this is true only if there's a source, and I couldn't find one. I did find the WWE Hall of Fame, but that already has an article. --UsaSatsui 16:02, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- But, these contracts are not promoted at all, and it's really just something known to the IWC. They really aren't notable and without a source, it's just a spam magnet. -- Scorpion 16:07, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - I disagree, and I'd love to debate it, but I'm not going to yet because we do agree on one thing: It's unsourced. If it gets a verifiable source, then I'll make my case, but until it does, it can't be kept and I support deletion. With no source the criteria is entirely subjective. (I've changed my vote to better reflect my feelings on this) --UsaSatsui 21:20, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - I do think the article has merits, and I waited a while before nominating it, but without any sources it's just cruft. -- Scorpion 21:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. It's not totally verifiable, and just a retread list of those in the WWE Hall Of Fame and who have action figures made. Put a section about the Legends program in the main WWE page, but delete this list. Booshakla 19:31, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: See this edit. Over two dozen "legends" were added by a random IP user with no sources whatsoever. -- Scorpion 20:19, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 15:07, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Inkpaduta 21:40, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This list appears to be half duplication of WWE Hall of Fame and half "I like these old wrestlers". While it is accurate that WWE does sign certain wrestlers to Legends contracts, and these contracts are structured differently than standard talent contract, the list in its current form constitutes WP:OR and fails WP:V. Soltak | Talk 23:42, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At least 1/4 (if not more) of the list are not verifiably signed to "legend contracts", which is an actual thing and the basis for the defense of this article, except that the list has no basis in reality and can be just as easily covered in the WWE Hall of Fame article. This just seems like a piece of excess baggage. Wayman975 21:12, 13 February 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.