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. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 11:06, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of nicknames of pro wrestlers[edit]

List of nicknames of pro wrestlers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Since I am not comfortable with a CSD tag on this article, I would identify this as WP:LISTCRUFT, and serves no purpose by being here. ArcAngel (talk) 06:57, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This AFD may now be moot as the page author requested deletion, however the edit was incorrectly reverted as vandalism. As the blanking was reverted, does the author's request still stand? ArcAngel (talk) 04:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ask for a snowy close. The author's blanking was incorrectly applied. And "moot" doesn't mean that, moot means still open for debate. Darrenhusted (talk) 13:50, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Burn with fire: WP:LISTCRUFT, most probably will never meet WP:RS requirements, does not belong in an encyclopedia. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 13:01, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep - Now is in a terrible state, but could make an interesting list -nicknaming is a quite notable part of wrestling, AFAIK. --Cycl^opia - ^talk 13:13, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, agree with 李博杰, totally unencyclopedic. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 13:14, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep One of the dangers of putting up a list, without working on it first in userspace, is that its shortcomings are more evident. This is an easy fix, probably doesn't even need to be userfied. Nicknames are an encyclopedic topic, and professional wrestling is a form of entertainment where everyone is required to have a nickname, and where most people aren't billed under their legal name. Unlike most paper encyclopedias, Wikipedia seems to have lots of articles about pro wrestlers, not something I'm interested in, but there are myriad people who enjoy it. Although this one needs some editing, there are ample sources for this type of information, and only the notable wrestlers will survive the "deadly bracket hold". The rest will turn bright red and get tossed out of the ring. Mandsford (talk) 15:13, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Mandsford just delivered a Shining Wizard to the nomination. Drmies (talk) 19:36, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete A list just for nicknames just screams listcruft to me and I don't see this ever being a useful article. No reliable sources either (the only source is a Angelfire site, which is hardly reliable as Angelfire is a free host for sites, so anyone can set up their own site for free and that use that as a source).
  • The above comment was mine, I forgot to sign. TJ Spyke 21:22, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete a list copied from an angelfire page (see:The Wrestler Who Made Milwaukee Famous (The Crusher [Reggie Lisowski]) and note the single brackets on both pages). Two concerns, first no RS and second a copyvio. If those were addressed it would still be unencyclopedic. Darrenhusted (talk) 21:00, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unsourced listcruft. GaryColemanFan (talk) 21:12, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment to the three !votes above: Most of these arguments are not grounds for deletion. "I don't see this ever being useful" or "unencyclopedic" is just WP:IDONTLIKEIT. No RS and copyvio are a true concern, yet AfD is not for cleanup, and this can be dealt on the article talk page: it is more than probable that sources for these nicknames exist. In summary, the article is now really problematic but all of this can be improved; as such these arguments do not make a rationale for deletion. --Cycl^opia - ^talk 21:17, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually, they are. You want strict ones normally used? Fine, it fails WP:V and WP:N. TJ Spyke 21:22, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Per WP:V: if you check you will find that a lot of pro wrestlers articles display their nicknames, along with sources. Per WP:N, it seems a common aspect of wrestling culture, and as such notable with respect to the topic. --Cycl^opia - ^talk 22:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you want to check the source used you will find that it is an exact copy, word for word, bracket for bracket, of the anglefire page, so how about WP:WEB? Or CSD A12 (copyvio)? Are you actually looking at the source at the bottom of the article? Darrenhusted (talk) 22:51, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've checked it, thanks, and I am well aware of that. It doesn't mean it cannot be improved anyway. As per the copyvio concern, I don't know exactly USA copyright regulation but I don't understand how a mere list can be considered original work (given how weird is USA copyright I may be wrong however). All what I am saying is basically: WP:CHANCE, WP:POTENTIAL. --Cycl^opia - ^talk 23:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since it retains the structure, format and down to the bracket typography it definitly does fall under "Copyright violation", the general content is not copyrighted no, but just copying it and not doing anything - as clear a copyright violation as it gets. This should be blanked due to copyright violation.  MPJ-DK  (No Drama) Talk  10:08, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. —♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 22:14, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Not notable.--WillC 01:42, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: not notable--Dcheagle (talk) 02:44, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, this article is listcruft and unmaintainable. There are wrestlers with dozens of nicknames...often, new nicknames are given for every character change or feud. What qualifies a nickname to make the list? Does it have to be long-term? How long is long-term? There are also thousands of wrestlers in the world and throughout history...should independent wrestlers be included? Foreign wrestlers? If so, it will be next to impossible to source them all with reliable sources. Nikki♥311 03:04, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete -- As WP:LISTCRUFT and WP:NN.--Truco ₅₀₃ 03:33, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm the one who created the article, it's ment to be improved. I hope this article won't get deleted. I was trying to find an article like this and I didn't find one so I decided to add this one. I'm certain that there's other people like me who have tried to find an article like this on Wikipedia. I do not see the reason to delete this asticle, there is other articles on lists of nicknames for sport players. This is only my 2nd article I have created, that's why it looks sloppy. So if you can please help me make this look better. Thank you everybody. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Preparationh (talk • contribs) 02:51, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You copy and pasted another site, that's a copyright violation. You didn't create the article, you copied it. There is nothing to improve. Darrenhusted (talk) 16:14, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's a list, I don't see how that is a copyright violation. For example If I copy and paste a recipe to make cake, I'm certain that would not be a copyright violation. I did create the small introduction at the beginning, and made some modifications to the list, so I did not simply copy and paste the entire thing. and lastly there is lots to improve. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Preparationh (talk • contribs) 20:04, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, if you took a recipe on another website and copied it to make a page on Wikipedia it would be a copyright violation. You took the page (right down to the placement of brackets) and copied it, wholesale. That you have since added an alphabetical index and added an intro does not change that fact. You started with a copyright violation, you did not create this article. To be an original work you would have to start by making it yourself, and each name would have to have several references, and each name would have to have a reference after them. However none of that would raise this to a level that met the GNG. Plagiarism is not the starting point for articles. Darrenhusted (talk) 20:18, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism is no good, but we can improve until it becomes no more plagiarism. --Cycl^opia - ^talk 22:38, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've change the list a lot, so right now there's a big difference of what I copied. I think the cake recipe was a bad example of what I was trying to say (I meant to say a cake in general not a specific kind of cake) a better example would be if I copy and paste a list of hockey team players, that wouldn't be a copyright violation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Preparationh (talk • contribs) 01:10, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it would. If another website lists the player of a hockey team with specific information and in a specific order (as the list you copied did, including all the parentheses and brackets) then you would violate the copyright of that site, even if you did not do it for profit. If you complied the same information from several sources then it would not be a violation. Copy and paste form one single site is always a breach of copyright. Learn that now before it gets you into trouble. And this list still fails the GNG. Darrenhusted (talk) 00:25, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - A nickname should be mentioned in an individual wrestler's article, not as a composite list in a stand-alone article. LucyDoo (talk) 19:18, 18 October 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.