Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeremiah Metcalf

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:48, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremiah Metcalf[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. He is a former fighter in his 40s who only won 1 of of his 3 fights in a top tier promotion. Very unlikely for him to meet GNG in the future, most coverage is through sports databases and routine sporting reports. ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 04:20, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 04:20, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 04:20, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 04:20, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep meets WP:NMMA. The three fights to meet WP:NMMA were about 15 years ago and the promotion of those fights, Strikeforce, has been defunct about 10 years. The odds of finding anything that old through conventional Google sources is small. But Strikeforce was a big deal back then and their fights/events gained a lot of coverage, which is why they are listed as a top tier organization. So I say follow the guideline that we presume sources do exist for this fighter through the events he took part in. Note that win/loss results don't matter; sources covering MMA bouts/events cover event winners and losers. RonSigPi (talk) 16:34, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You'd have to provide evidence of SIGCOV to show he meets GNG. The point of WP:MMABIO is to allow MMA pages to exist with the idea that they can meet GNG in the future, I couldn't find much coverage outside sports databases and a few routine interviews from journalists. You gotta understand that not everyone that competes in a top tier mma promotion means they meet GNG, which is most important compared to wikiproject guidelines. ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 05:22, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That is fine, but why did you wait 9 years to raise this for deletion? In 2013, sources probably could have been found or alternatively a through check could have been done with nothing found, so the decision is easy/easier. Doing this now, it we are just guessing on what was out there at creation. I agree SNG does not trump GNG, but SNG exists for cases like this. RonSigPi (talk) 00:48, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Probably because I wasn't on wikipedia 9 years ago. I started editing around 2019. ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 02:28, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There is not enough Sigcov to meet GNG. The sports SNGs specifically say they do not overrule the need for GNG. There is a proposal to delete these misused SNGs, and those who are opposing it are explicitly accepting this limiting of their scope and saying that those who want them to go are over-reacting because they do not trump GNG, and that administrators should stop blindly accepting false claims that sports SNGs can in fact trump GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:20, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree he meets WP:NMMA but that he fails to meet WP:GNG. The problem is that many MMA fighters have little coverage except for reporting on their results. With the seemingly increased focus on SNGs vs. the GNG, we're having a lot more AfD discussions on individuals who meet an SNG. This is particularly noticeable for middle of the pack fighters (Metcalf's highest ever ranking by fightmatrix.com was 74th). Papaursa (talk) 21:04, 8 February 2022 (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.