Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Progress World Cup

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. Kurykh (talk) 00:27, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Progress World Cup

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

Article about a wrestling tournament. Fails WP:GNG for lack of available independent sources. Also fails WP:SPORTSEVENT as far as I can tell.- Mr X 18:32, 20 April 2017 (UTC) - Mr X 18:32, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. FITINDIA (talk) 18:34, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 18:55, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages because of exactly the same reasons as above, fail WP:GNG and WP:SPORTSEVENT these pages may have been created by a meat puppet or sock puppet:

Keep - this is a notable tournament of the Progress Wrestling, a British professional wrestling promotion, so its notable. TheBuilder456 (talk) 20:57, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Tournament doesn't meet WP:GNG. Just because Progress Wrestling is notable, doesn't mean every tournament is (WP:NOTINHERITED). Nikki♥311 01:22, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom 86.3.174.49 (talk) 16:53, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails GNG, NOTINHERITED.LM2000 (talk) 09:33, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I support deleting the other articles which have since been bundled. As I noted on the AfD for William Eaver (wrestler): "You can't inherit notability even from the most notable subjects and it wasn't that long ago that an AfD on Progress Wrestling closed with no consensus."LM2000 (talk) 02:37, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree that the other bundled articles should be deleted for the same reasons. - Mr X 19:07, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:08, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ Comment - this is a notable tournament of the Progress Wrestling and because Progress is partner of wwe and is notablie TheBuilder123 (talk) 12:57, 26 April 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.252.244.38 (talk) comment moved by Domdeparis (talk) 12:26, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Do you know what I'm sick and tired of this, what are your problem with me, my articles and my contributions because I have not guts, because I'm not welcomed in Wikipedia, because it's not notable just tell me once and for all, Do you know yes ThePerstigeousTalker13 was my old account but I created this because I forgot the password and I didn't registered any email. If you have any problem that mentioned above just tell me once and for all, if you want to block me, just block me, I'm telling the truth and that's what it matters. I prefer an hard and rough truth than a delusional lie

Thanks for your time

TheBuilder456 (talk) 16:31, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The belts can be merged with Progress Wrestling, as is done on Global Force Wrestling but they're not independently notable. Your contribution is appreciated but you have to follow guidelines, including WP:GNG.LM2000 (talk) 23:13, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't take it personally especially as they are not your articles they belong to the community; Everyone is welcome on Wikipedia but as LM2000 we all have to abide by the guidelines your explanation for the multiple accounts are fine but what is not really fine is signing another keep vote! when you are logged out with a fictional account User:TheBuilder123. When you make a comment on a talk page and don't sign it correctly a bot automatically adds your signature even when you try to fake the signature. You have done this three times and this is not at all ok. Domdeparis (talk) 09:58, 27 April 2017 (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.