WWE action figures is within the scope of WikiProject Professional wrestling, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to professional wrestling. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, visit the project to-do page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to discussions.Professional wrestlingWikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestlingTemplate:WikiProject Professional wrestlingProfessional wrestling
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Toys, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of toys on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ToysWikipedia:WikiProject ToysTemplate:WikiProject ToysToys
Article also needs to be verified. The article only have only one citation and that was to the official WWE Mattel site. The article seems to still have WP:PROMO stuff but i also tried removing some of that. Overall? Needs a rewrite and more citations for verification. SMBMovieFan (talk) 23:42, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed your tagging of promotional text for each section. The problem applies to the entire article, so I have added the tag in the multiple issues template instead. VickKiang(talk)00:04, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Although the coverage on the current WWE action figures is fine, there NEEDS to be more citations to be verifed. Yes, this article is notable, and the WP:PROMO is gone, but this article seriously needs to be improved. If not, then the article could be merged into WWE. SMBMovieFan (talk) 15:00, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your interesting reply, but which criteria per WP:MERGE does this meet? A controversial merge would need a discussion, but the unverfiable parts can still be trimmed. That alone IMO isn't a good rationale- there isn't policies or guidelines recommending merging for every article needing cleanup. Besides, no one in the AfD supported merge, do you think that the article is too short or need additional context? VickKiang(talk)20:02, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]