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 - Peripitus (Talk) 11:25, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blood sweat and ears[edit]

Blood sweat and ears is one in a loooooong line of professional wrestling organisations. But like most, they do not appear to be notable enough for Wikipedia. A ecis^Brievenbus 00:27, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep I see some coverage of their events, it appears this one is just on the edge of notability. That said, they're mostly behind pay gates and I don 't know the slightest thing about wrestling so can't help much with this one. I'll see if I can tag the right group that can. _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 13:36, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. —_{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 13:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. —_{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 13:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep My gut reaction was to delete, but the sources provided in the above post changed my mind. This organization has received regular coverage from SLAM! Sports, which is the best reliable source for Canadian wrestling. The roster also contains many notable names (Abyss, Kanyon, Dreamer, Rhino, Daniels, and Cage), and the results show that several more notable wrestlers also appear sporadically. The article needs to be expanded to include these assertations of notability, though. GaryColemanFan (talk) 14:21, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

weak Keep Appears to be notable based on the statement above and the fact that some notable wrestlers have been associated with it. When it comes to venues like this one must consider the notability of the people involved with it. Wrestling organizations would not be notable if it were not for their notable talent, correct? Still needs a lot of work. (Roodhouse1 (talk) 15:50, 22 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Note that this organization previously flunked an AFD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blood Sweat and Ears. This version of the article is significantly weaker, in fact, than the version that was previously deleted: it's much shorter and contains no references or external links, while the previously deleted version did. I suspect, overall, that the organization is sufficiently notable for a proper article, and if anybody's willing to tackle getting it up to snuff I'll gladly restore a copy of the much better original article for them to work with. But as currently written, the article isn't a keep candidate in the least. Keep if somebody's willing to work on it, but delete if it's going to stay in its current state. Bearcat (talk) 03:55, 25 May 2008 (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.