Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jersey All Pro Wrestling (2nd nomination)

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 keep. (

Non-administrator closure) NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:34, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

Jersey All Pro Wrestling

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

Non notable wrestling promotion. It lacks the significant independent coverage required by

WP:GNG and there's no indication of notability. Even if the promotion had some notable wrestlers, the organization's notability is not inherited from the wrestlers. Jakejr (talk) 03:06, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:49, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:49, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:49, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Notability not supported by references.Peter Rehse (talk) 13:02, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ I agree with the nominator. The article lacks significant independent sources to show the promotion is notable and the organization's notability can not be inherited just because wrestlers who later became notable once competed there. Papaursa (talk) 21:40, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral The additional sources found by Nikki311 refer to a New Jersey legislative issue about extreme wrestling. The topic could be considered

WP:NOTNEWS and, either way, it appears you could argue that this organization is mentioned more in passing. However, there's enough to make me think about things so I've changed my vote. Papaursa (talk) 19:36, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

Keep, significant independent coverage on Nightline, in The New York Times and in The Wall Street Journal. Nikki♥311 02:54, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Given Nikki's findings, I believe it meets minimum GNG requirements.LM2000 (talk) 09:19, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:51, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As above. J 1982 (talk) 16:35, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep One of the most important independent promotions in the United States, and the host of New Japan Pro Wrestling's first American tour. Sufficient coverage in reliable sources to establist notability. GaryColemanFan (talk) 22:47, 17 August 2014 (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.