Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JT Southern - Wikipedia
- 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. Stifle (talk) 10:08, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- JT Southern (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Unsourced since 2007 - the only reference is a Geocities site; No reliable sources found. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 09:17, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. —-- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 09:22, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as a violation of WP:ATHLETE. Claritas (talk) 10:03, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- In what sense is it a violation? GaryColemanFan (talk) 15:25, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - WP:ATHLETE states that an athlete meets the notability threshold if he or she competed regularly at the top level of a sport. In this case, JT Southern was a regular, featured wrestler in World Championship Wrestling, one of the big two promotions in the United States. The article needs some work, but deletion is never the answer when notability is already demonstrated in the article. GaryColemanFan (talk) 15:25, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I'm not an expert in wrestling, but looking at the 3 sources currently in the article:
- I don't have access to this book (Wrestling Title Histories) - could you possibly quote exactly what it says about JT Southern?
- wrestling-titles.com: It shows the CWA International Tag Team Title holders - but my impression is that CWA isn't counted as the top level? If there was some indication of his participation in WCW which is, then that might be different.
- SLAM! Wrestling: "Joey Maggs dead at age" - The sole mention of Southern is A guy named J.T. Southern was so bad that I pulled a good match out of him
- Could you find reliable sources which shows that he was a regular featured wrestler in WCW? -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 15:40, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I'm not an expert in wrestling, but looking at the 3 sources currently in the article:
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:12, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:29, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per Phantomsteve.--Curtis23's Usalions 16:57, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cirt (talk) 23:09, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. WP:ATHLETE doesn't require a professional athlete to compete at the "top" level. It simply requires to have "competed at the fully professional level of a sport." This was a professional wrestler; by definition he competed at the fully professional level. ~Amatulić (talk) 03:49, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I see this guy has a bunch of references. He both wrestled and played sidekick in WCW--that's the top professional level. Unquestionable that he should not be deleted.Sarcasto (talk) 00:34, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Based on a reason given by nominator, I take it as a bad faith nomination, quoting WP:NORUSH. Optakeover(Talk) 16:41, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps I am misunderstanding what you are saying, but how is this nomination bad faith on my part? I may be wrong about the lack of references available (although it appears that a lot of the references since provided rely on publications which I have not got access to) - but it remains a fact that it was unreferenced for 3 years, and that I was not able to find suitable references in my searches. Yes, there is "no rush" - but if a new BLP was to be unreferenced for 10 days, it could be deleted. And I don't think waiting 3 years is "rushing"... and I don't see any evidence that you have looked for reliable sources in the last week, let alone in the previous 3 years... -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 19:46, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- An article should be deleted if it doesn't meet the WP:NOTABILITY criteria for inclusion. An unreferenced BLP of a notable subject shouldn't be deleted, although a deletion nomination is one way to force improvements. Rather, it should be subject to some non-deleting action, such as stubbifying to known references, expanding the references, or merging with another article. In any case, the article seems to have plenty of references now, so this nomination should probably be closed. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:05, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps I am misunderstanding what you are saying, but how is this nomination bad faith on my part? I may be wrong about the lack of references available (although it appears that a lot of the references since provided rely on publications which I have not got access to) - but it remains a fact that it was unreferenced for 3 years, and that I was not able to find suitable references in my searches. Yes, there is "no rush" - but if a new BLP was to be unreferenced for 10 days, it could be deleted. And I don't think waiting 3 years is "rushing"... and I don't see any evidence that you have looked for reliable sources in the last week, let alone in the previous 3 years... -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 19:46, 24 May 2010 (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.