Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jamie Lee Stone

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 epic delete under WP:SNOW. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 16:21, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jamie Lee Stone

Subject fails WP:BIO and article fails WP:BLP. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 14:43, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - it might fail WP:BIO but it has sufficient information to make it a "stub", all we need is sources, and it can be kept.TrUcO9311 ^TaLk / _SiGn 14:55, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I just ran an engine search and you are right this guy appears nowhere on the web, so no verifiability can be done.--TrUcO9311 ^TaLk / _SiGn 15:05, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep - per Truco. iMatthew 14:58, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - (As to what Truco said) - If that is the case, then delete. I had thought that you had some reliable sources that could be included. If not, delete. iMatthew 15:11, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What valid or valuable information does it have? The guy is a total non-entity working for a promotion that is virtually unknown (even by British wrestling's lowly standards). ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 14:59, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. Only two hits on a Google search for "Jamie Lee Stone" wrestler are a WP userpage and a WP mirror site. No coverage in reliable sources = no notability. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 15:23, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Cheers, L A X 16:12, 13 January 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.