Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roger Bowling (fighter)

: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 keep. Withdraw as a procedural nomination per User_talk:NuclearWarfare#Jason_Pierce_and_Jeremy_May_Deletion and User_talk:NuclearWarfare#Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion.2FRoger_Bowling_.28fighter.29. No prejudice to future nominations for deletion, which must be under a different rationale than G7. (non-admin closure) NW (Talk) 15:23, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

=[[Roger Bowling (fighter)]]=

:{{la|Roger Bowling (fighter)}} ([{{fullurl:Roger Bowling (fighter)|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roger Bowling (fighter)}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

One of the two authors who wrote this in March tried to G7 the page. WereSpielChequers declined it, and an IP placed the tag back on. I removed that, and I am sending this to AfD as a procedural nomination. I am neutral as to whether it gets kept or deleted. NW (Talk) 01:10, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

:*I just realized that the two contributors who contributed the most edits to the article were an IP and an editor, both of whom placed G7 on the talk page. I am unsure of whether enough substantial edits have been made for G7 to apply still, but it might. NW (Talk) 01:13, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Speedy Delete per G7 Judging by the edit history, there have been four contributions made to the page other than those of the two main authors and deletion-related edits. Two of those removed copyvio, one added a category, and one fixed a link. All of the content was added by the two editors who requested deletion, so G7 applies. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 02:58, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep MMA fighting, unlike boxing or other sports, doesn't generate a high level of mainstream media attention. However, Mr. Bowling has been the subject of at least two in-depth articles in mainstream media outlets -- [http://sports.yahoo.com/mma/news;_ylt=Ah4UL7xAQc3fjByZhy2yKwE9Eo14?slug=ys-bowling032509&prov=yhoo&type=lgns] and [http://www.peoplesdefender.com/main.asp?SectionID=2&SubSectionID=2&ArticleID=128246&TM=48164.46] -- plus he holds at least two welterweight championship titles. Problems with the text can be fixed in editing, but I think deleting the article is an excessive step. Pastor Theo (talk) 03:19, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 03:38, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 03:38, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep as notable due to adequate coverage in reliable sources (demonstrated in the article and by Pastor Theo), but remove the first paragraph in the Biography section as a BLP issue. JJL (talk) 03:45, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep unless someone has a reason for deletion besides CSD G7. Deletions under G7 should be "uncontroversial" like PRODs and the fact that a rescue tag has been placed on the article shows that someone wants it kept. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 13:55, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

: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.