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 Rotten regard Softnow 23:22, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WrestleMania XXIX (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This yet to happen event fails the WP:NOT policy, it is sourced only to routine sports announcements none of which detail what will be the lasting significance of this event. It will be one of countless hundreds of televised and reported on sports events that take part on the last weekend of the year around the globe. JonnyBonesJones (talk) 08:34, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Obvious keep. Wrestlemania events always have lasting significance. With only 29 entries to the series, it is not an example of "countless hundreds". One of WWE's "big four" events. The article will be recreated in January (at the absolute latest) anyway. – Richard BB 09:32, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep has been an annual event for 29 years, will happen and is as notable as every single event that has already happened.  MPJ -US  11:29, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Its as notable as the next Super Bowl which also has articles for the next couple years. Its also a Pay Per View not televised. Im questioning if you even nominated the right article. Theres always a long standing impact of Wrestlemania. STATic message me! 20:29, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 November 14. Snotbot  t • c »  21:25, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment While there might be a question to the pointy nature of the nomination, the nomination is not without merit, passing the notability test does not mean the article should be included in the Encyclopaedia, if for example it fails the core WP:NOT policy, while I have not had chance to look for sources not linked, currently this event would appear to fail WP:NOT to quote "Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopaedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion. For example, routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports, or celebrities is not a sufficient basis for inclusion in the encyclopaedia. at the moment this is sourced to only just such sources so can some one please demonstrate that this event has received more than routine news reporting, otherwise it should be deleted or redirected until such time as it does. Mtking ^(edits) 21:32, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Its source even if poorly which can be fixed with a little bit of work.--Dcheagle • talk • contribs 23:47, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep definitely notable. --Shorthate (talk) 00:45, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 14:38, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The event will happen, like the next three Superbowls, and is a significant event within the wrestling industry. Get better sources but a delete is unnecessary. Darrenhusted (talk) 14:09, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep Obviously one of the many bad faith nominations by MMA fanatic JonnyBonesJones. Clearly a notable event with a lasting significance. One might argue about any other regular WWE PPV but surely not about WM. I don't see JonnyBonesJones nominate future MMA events under the WP:NOT policy. I wonder why that is... not. Blocpark (talk) 18:22, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I think we should all assume good faith on this, that being said, you didnt give a valid reason on why this article should be kept. JonnyBonesJones (talk) 04:54, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Keep I don't think there is much of a reason to assume good faith for an AfD as confusing as this one. Byuusetsu (talk) 04:13, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The article fails the WP:NOT policy, specifically the section Wikipedia is not a newspaper where it says While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion. For example, routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports, or celebrities is not a sufficient basis for inclusion in the encyclopedia., as this newsworth event is only covered by such routine coverage it should be deleted. The text of the article itself makes no claims as to why it will have any lasting effect. Now to an analysis the sources :

1. New York Post
2. WrestleMania press conference (WWE)
3. WrestleMania 29 to be held in New Jersey at MetLife Stadium (www.thewrestlingtimes.com)
4. Pro Wrestling Torch

No.1. is the verbatim transcript of an interview with the COO of the promoter, this is as well as being a response to the announcement also not independent; No.2 is from the promoter; No.3 is a link to the home page of www.thewrestlingtimes.com and No.4 is a report on press release there is no analysis of how this event will have any lasting effect. Mtking ^(edits) 20:42, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Do your contributions to this site consist solely of enforcing WP:NOT in the most counterproductive manner possible? Byuusetsu (talk) 04:13, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Wow, it is simply ridiculous how Wikipedia has become a place for self-promoters like Mtking or JonnyBonesJones, who downplay everything they are not personally fond of and/or hold a grudge against. Saying that WrestleMania had no lasting effect is like denying a lasting effect of an NFL SuperBowl. Keep in mind: Wikipedia is the same encyclopedia that has an entry on Here Comes Honey Boo Boo. I don't see the aformentioned contributors try to have that deleted. WM is obviously a Strong Keep! Blocpark (talk) 14:13, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Instant keep. JonnyBonesJones and Mtking are UFC enthusiasts with a proven anti-WWE agenda. Spout WP:CIVIL nonsense if you want: fuck everything about these nominations and these vicarious little UFC people. أنا أحبك (talk) 04:45, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Every WrestleMania event is significant, this event will certainly happen, et cetera. Jeff Silvers (talk) 16:53, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Strongest Keep Possible this is pro wrestling's Super Bowl. To delete it would be as if deleting Super Bowl XLVII or 2013 World Series. The event's notability is of that nature. It is also where the event's lasting notability comes from. The WP:NOT argument is ridiculous. Again, it looks like a nominator just looking for something to delete.  Looks like a duck to me. Also, just in case that I'm wrong and NOT does apply, I think a rational argument could be made to justify ignoring it. CRRaysHead90 | ^{Get Some!} 21:37, 21 November 2012 (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.