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. Cirt (talk) 11:13, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dingo (wrestler)[edit]

Little known independent wrestler with little claim to notability, and questionable verifiability - especially relating to the claim that he is Australian. Winning a couple of small indy titles hardly proves notability. !! Justa Punk !! 04:00, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - As far as I'm concerned , winning at least two titles that are notable enough to have Wikipedia articles is sufficient to establish notability. Since the guy wrestles under such a generic name it may not be super easy to find sources, but I am sure they are out there. (The winning of the titles is established by the current references though.) I'm not sure why the nom would signal out probably the least objectionable fact in the whole article but it takes less than 60 secs to establish that he is Australian:
- Cagematch profile
- Bio @ official homepage

--ThaddeusB (talk) 04:11, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Winning minor titles hardly proves notability. Bio requires independent verification. !! Justa Punk !! 04:22, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Winning one minor title usually doesn't, but winning several often does. He has won at least 5 titles (and the article said three more before you edited it out for referencing reasons), two of which are notable enough for Wikipedia entries. Independent verification is required to establish notability (and has been supplied in the article), but that doesn't mean every detail needs to be independently confirmed. It is silly to say we can't take the guy's own word for it that he is Australian, for example. --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:30, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored the title you deleted as the original source provided did establish that Dingo (then Diamondback Dingo) won the title: "March 28, 2003--Gateway Championship Wrestling: Diamondback Dingo defeated Delirious for the vacant GCW Championship" ... I have also seen title info for this event in other (not technically reliable) sources, so I am confident it is true. That makes 8 titles he has won. --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:43, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Eight local promotion title wins does not prove notability. Would you mind telling us what part of WP:N that passes, Thaddeus? I say not a part of it. There is a history of wrestlers claiming to be from a country that they really weren't. Rick Doodle (talk) 06:02, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The only promotion he lists that could be considered anything less than a minor one is ROH and he didn't hold a title in it. Niteshift36 (talk) 06:34, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. —Nikki♥311 07:12, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Niteshift said it all. Not notable. TaintedZebra (talk) 09:02, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Only one of the feds that he won titles in is in any way notable so that wrecks the argument of Thaddeus regarding 8 titles. IWA Mid South appears inactive making this person's current reign hardly notable. Get Dumb 10:45, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - clearly unnotable. Eusebeus (talk) 13:09, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete: I can see this guy being notable. He has won a few titles, is covered by a few sites, and has worked for ROH. However, out of all the sites within the article. Only two or three could be considered even a little reliable and they aren't even about him. The Solie, the Wrestle Titles, and the Online World of Wrestling refs could be considered a little reliable. IWA is primary and Cage match is still not cleared. For now, no reliable third party sources, I say no.--WillC 13:26, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-notable worker. Afkatk (talk) 13:39, 13 June 2009 (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.