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]

Melisschif[edit]

Melisschif (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Not a notable tag team on its own, as they haven't won any notable championships or have and significant third party coverage about the team. All the information is already covered in the articles of the individual members. Nikki♥311 03:25, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. —Nikki♥311 03:26, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Niteshift36 (talk) 06:38, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• This one is extremely hard to even think about. I feel the team is very notable. Dear God their feud is known throughout the wrestling world. Though the article is in such a terriable place at the moment. Against my better judgment I'm going to have to vote Keep. I see potential in this article. With work, it could be something. Though not owning any Shimmer DVDs and just watching what I find, the name seems fan made. I could easily find a photo of the team though. I see notability.--WillC 13:31, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Their feud has nothing do with them as a "team", though, as they obviously weren't teaming at the time. That's why I think the information is better off in their individual articles. Nikki♥311 17:41, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yeah their feud has nothing to do with the teams notability. But the team has become known because of the feud. See because their feud is known, once they began teaming, they were known as a tag team. It has helped establish them a bit.--WillC 05:17, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete if it has questionable Notability now it can always be recreated when its notable. Afkatk (talk) 14:55, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Afkatk TaintedZebra (talk) 02:29, 15 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.