Cruft in trivia section A backstage segment featuring dancing is certainly fancruft that doesn t belong It being a reunion of sorts and it being at WM doesn t make it any more notable at all The dance segment didn t affect any of the matches and certainly doesn t help the article I suggest moving to the notes section 3 16 It s always been in the notes section that s not the problem here The problem is it s a backstage segment Backstage segments aren t notable and don t affect the matches or anything why add this one over others Just because it was a reunion isn t a good enough reason in my opinion People certainly could argue the Boogey Man Trump segment was notable as it featured the first time the 2 had interaction or just on the fact Trump appeared It s fancruft and serves no purpose except that some people might think it s interesting That s not enough to keep it on the article Oh I didn t see that Hmmm let me see what I can do with it 3 16 I think that we should just add them to the other talent section if they aren t there already and not mention the dance It was pretty pointless and doesn t seem necessary Peace The rid While I agree that the Boogeyman segment wasn t notable this segment had the return of Slick first time in like 15 years and a bunch of other WWE legends It being a reunion and at WM does help its case IMO especially the reunion part You are saying being a backstage segment is the problem so you wouldn t be objecting if they had done this on the stage or in the ring If we mentioned them in the on screen talent section what would we put down for them so someone else doesn t remove it It also got covered in most reviews and coverage of the event coevering the notability part Being cruft is an opinion being a reunion featuring over a dozen legends and covered by almost every review makes it worth at least mentioning Eh the return of Slick is pretty important I ll change my vote to Weak Support as I had forgotten about that point Peace The rid Covered in almost every review I find that very hard to believe Provide some proof Also so what if it s covered The matches are reviewed in the reviews as well that doesn t mean we will start listing highlights for each match I also recall there being a guideline on Wikipedia about it not being a democracy meaning not everything should be determined by a vote I somehow think if this fancruft was gone no one would be re adding except for TJ From the edit history it seems like he was the only one re adding it back That certainly shows that people don t care about it A few talk page posts in favor of it isn t much consensus to keep it on the article and among others Other people have added it back I just get to it first usually Considering OWW is a fansite only the Slam link is reliable Anyone can write a review and mention it fansites aren t a reliable source I ve seen no edit history of anyone else re adding it back so I m still going to believe no one else has until I see otherwise If I need to bring an admin into this I will Because in my opinion it s a content dispute between me and TJ as no one else seems to care much about ONE LITTLE crufty thing Slick returned for ONE appearance post it on the Slick article and leave it at that I could find more if I tried that was in a quick 1 minute search I could flip it and say only you think it should be removed I don t see the big deal It s not cruft it s notable based on what counts as being notable an