Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WCW (WWE subsidiary)

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. Consensus is for the article to be retained. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:32, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WCW (WWE subsidiary)

WCW (WWE subsidiary) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats

)

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

This is a not needed

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. Galatz גאליץ^{שיחה Talk} 18:16, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:37, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:38, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:38, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:38, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment In some way I think it's good to separate what is the actual company and the leftovers that still exists, but on the other hand I don't know if this is notbale.
  talk) 19:35, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • What is this new company other than a holding company for a tape library? WWE uses it to put out some videos and to tell stories for Network shows, but all of that relates to pre-sale stuff. I don't see anything post 2001 that would be even remotely notable. - Galatz גאליץ^{שיחה Talk} 19:57, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • I get what you mean, but being honest I think there should be some coverage, if we tried to make something of this it might be good. But I'm torn.
      talk) 17:35, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
      ]
• Weak keep I have the same mixed feelings Treker does. Everything here is already sprinkled throughout World Championship Wrestling, The Alliance (professional wrestling), The Invasion (professional wrestling), etc. but having it all in one place isn't necessarily a bad thing.LM2000 (talk) 08:03, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• I appreciate the nominator's concerns but tend toward weak keep per LM2000. Sharonaj (talk) 16:57, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I agree that any duplicate information in the WWE article should be culled, but the WCW in my mind should clearly be kept separate, as it is similar to Oldsmobile is to General Motors. Markvs88 (talk) 02:49, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep To distinguish the two and as stated above, any duplicate information from the article can be removed to keep this article distinct. There is enough sourcing and info for it to remain a stand alone article. JC7V (talk) 21:11, 22 November 2018 (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.