Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WWE wins top 10

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 per WP:SNOW. –Cheers, L A X 15:32, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WWE wins top 10

This is an unnecessary page that will almost certainly be out of date frequently. It also contains no content except for a poorly formatted table. Mblumber (talk) 01:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I'm not sure if this can be speedied by A7 - it's a list. Not only is it formatted incorrectly, it makes absolutely no assertion of notability, provides absolutely no context, and is generally terrible. Nousernamesleft^{copper, not wood} 01:54, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, agree with Nousernamesleft (talk · contribs). Poor formatting to boot. Cirt (talk) 03:47, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no sources; looks like WP:OR to me. Frank | talk 13:38, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as an unsourced list with no information. — Wenli ^{(reply here)} 02:45, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not only is unsourced, it's cruft. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 00:34, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:25, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (are we getting close to WP:SNOW?) I'm not sure how having a list of winning percentages from April 1, 2007 to May 29, 2008 (an arbitrary date range with no stated rationale for this decision) would benefit the encyclopedia. No sources, so I imagine we are just supposed to assume that these numbers have some basis in reality. A textbook case of original research. GaryColemanFan (talk) 02:16, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - unsourced and OR. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 14:50, 31 May 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.