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 adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result wasdelete.BJ^Talk23:45, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wrestlemania win loss records (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views) (delete) – (View log)

Trivial page that is not needed.iMatthew (talk)12:14, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge into theWrestlemania article.Lugnuts (talk)12:30, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in thelist of Wrestling-related deletion discussions.—♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥14:14, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no need for merge, information isList Cruft.--S_RX14:18, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per SRX.Gavyn Sykes (talk)14:19, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Assuming the list is complete and accurate, I see no reason whynot to keep this around, either at its own article or as part ofWrestlemania. It seems fair to list all the wrestlers who have competed at the event, along with their relative levels of success there. That's not what I'd call "cruft"; that's just basic, useful information. (Of course, some sources would be good.)Zagalejo^^^16:43, 14 September 2008 (UTC),[reply]

  Coment The dude makes a wicked point, if it can be sourced, merge it.Altenhofen (talk)21:48, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge intoWrestlemania - no need to lose the existing work. Maybe cut out those with less than five matches for space. Not cruft, is actually rather useful, discriminate, and tailored to a particular set of information.Stu^(aeiou)20:44, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Merge May be trivial, but it could very well enhance the Wrestlemania article. The article itself is infact very pointless, but as a section in a larger article, it would probably, as I said before, help the article.Altenhofen (talk)21:46, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree with Merge votes - No it can not, for one because the list is incomplete and the list can go on and on, do you know how many people have wrestled at 'Mania? Over 100,000. This will just make the article longer and the information would just be trivial. CitingWP:TRIVIA andWP:LISTCRUFT--S_RX20:30, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Though I wouldn't be surprised if some names are missing, I'm curious where you come up with that number. The WWE website only provides results for about a half-dozen matches per year. (I'll admit that I don't really follow wrestling, so if your number is correct, I'll vote delete.)Zagalejo^^^20:43, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I doubt we really need an article about wins and losses. If we did, we would need a list of that for every major sport and event. So, I say it's best if the article isdeleted. Merging won't do much good anyway.SAVIOR_SELF.77703:08, 18 September 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 adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.