Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Welcoming Committee (WWE)

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. So Why 13:11, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Welcoming Committee (WWE)

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

Doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:ENTERTAINER. The individuals are notable, but the team is not. No significant coverage of the team in reliable independent sources. All sources in the article are WP:ROUTINE. Also WP:TOOSOON. Nikki♥311 02:54, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Nikki♥311 02:54, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. Nikki♥311 02:54, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Nikki♥311 02:54, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: As with other "non-notable" teams, there may be more coverage over time. Hansen Sebastian 13:44, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
- That's not a valid keep argument. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Quote: Notability is based on objective evidence of whether sufficient reliable sources have taken notice already, not on subjective judgments of whether people should take notice in the future. Nikki♥311 16:35, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Purely promotional in nature. Power~enwiki (talk) 18:30, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails GNG, all useful material can be contained in individual articles. Most of the stuff here isn't usable though, it's WP:NOTNEWS week-by-week updates using WP:ROUTINE sources. They may become notable later on but right now it's WP:TOOSOON.LM2000 (talk) 09:31, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:GNG. As LM2000 and Nikki point out, current coverage is all routine, and WP is not a crystal ball. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:02, 19 May 2017 (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.