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. SoWhy 10:46, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Lewis (wrestler) (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)

Doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:ENTERTAINER. No significant coverage in reliable independent sources. Sources in article are primary, trivial mentions, or databases. Also appears to be an amateur bodybuilder so doesn't meet WP:ATHLETE. Nikki♥311 20:37, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bodybuilding-related deletion discussions. Nikki♥311 20:37, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. Nikki♥311 20:37, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I do not believe this page should be deleted because sources that are used are legitimate such as nwasupreme.com, a website ran by a promotion where Josh Lewis wrestles. Josh Lewis is not involved in any way with this website and can not influence it's content. Furthermore, Lewis has competed in the Arnold Classic. This competition is ran by the International Federation of Bodybuilders. According to the IFBB's rules, "You cannot compete in the IFBB until you are an “IFBB Pro” from winning a NPC national show." Since Josh has won multiple NPC national shows and competed in three Arnold Classics, this would consider him a bodybuilding pro and not just an amateur. User:Jasonecohen6

Actually, I don't even see bodybuilding listed at WP:ATHLETE, so we'll just have to use WP:GNG to determine notability. NWA Supreme is a company that Lewis wrestles for and is therefore considered a primary source. It does not establish notability. Nikki♥311 03:00, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I respectfully disagree with Nikki and request that this page stay up It does meet all requirements for professional wrestling. I disagree with Nikki about the references nwa website does meet requirements. All so pro wrestling illustrated is a very strong reference. As well as many other references that are list on page. I have no affiliation with anyone. I'm not an expert on bodybuilding but the facts and references for pro wrestling are very strong and I believe this page should stay up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jesse952015 (talk • contribs) 12:39, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jesse952015 has made no other edits to Wikipedia outside of this nomination. The Pro Wrestling Illustrated link (I think you mean this one [1]) doesn't even mention him. Even if it did, it would be a trivial mention at best. Nikki♥311 22:42, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:43, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

An updated reference has been added for the Pro Wrestling Illustrated issue that states that Josh Lewis is ranked #9 in the NWA. These rankings are compiled by the world's number one print wrestling magazine, lending credibility to Josh Lewis being considered notable User:Jasonecohen6 —Preceding undated comment added 20:09, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I request that this page stay up, looks to have very good references. I have no affiliates with NWA or Josh Lewis. I have done a few title change updates on this page — Preceding unsigned comment added by NWATilteUpdates (talk • contribs) 21:36, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - It has been brought to my attention via my talk page that User:Jasonecohen6 is the webmaster at nwasupreme.com, thus presenting a COI. Nikki♥311 02:21, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
•  Comment: I notice the article is sourced heavily on with Wrestling-Titles.com and Cagematch. Not saying they aren't reliable sources. Just more reliable third party sources are needed. Is Indy Power Rankings notable with the project guidelines? I know a lot of wrestling see value in them. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 06:43, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Wrestling Titles and Cagematch are considered reliable, but they do not establish notability because they are databases with no criteria for inclusion. As for Indy Power Rankings, I don't know much about them, but from reading the website, it seems more like a bunch of wrestling fans rather than experts in the field. Regardless, it is just a trivial mention of a non-notable title which doesn't establish notability either. Nikki♥311 08:48, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It looks to me as this is personal not professional Nikki has a history of taking down. NWA pages. She has removed lots of them, not only NWA wrestlers but NWA title histories and NWA promotions. Pro wrestling illustrated source does check out. She said Josh Lewis is not on reference. Referance does check out Josh Lewis in ranking for NWA supreme and in the NWA overall ranking. I wounder what is her motivation? It seem personal Not professional Why not fix some of these pages she removes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by NWATilteUpdates (talk • contribs)

It is not personal, and I have nothing against the NWA. I have a history of nominating pages for deletion that don't meet Wikipedia criteria, and the vast majority of them were deleted as the community agreed with me. Unfortunately, a lot of NWA wrestlers do not meet criteria. Also, if you read above, the PWI source did not work and was switched out, which is why it now mentions Lewis. However, it is still a trivial mention and does not establish notability per WP:GNG. Nikki♥311 08:48, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Even though I shouldn't have to defend myself against your anti-NWA allegations, I will. I also have a history of improving NWA articles. For example, I was behind NWA World Women's Championship becoming a Featured List (see here). Nikki♥311 09:05, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Basically per nom, unless author wants it Userfied. I did several Gnews searchs with different keywords and came up empty. Also sources are mostly NWA listings or to things like his website. L3X1 (distænt write) @ 02:06, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: No significant coverage in secondary, reliable sources to establish notability. --Darth Mike^(talk) 12:13, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as failing WP:GNG per nom. Also, the discussion should be on the subject of the article, not on the nominator's activities outside of the article. WP:ADHOM. Ifnord (talk) 18:41, 28 September 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.