Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tina Lähdemäki

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. Mkdw ^talk 15:21, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tina Lähdemäki[edit]

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

Non notable MMA fighter since she fails to meet WP:NMMA. She has only 1 top tier fight and that was a loss. Jakejr (talk) 02:19, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 02:25, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 02:26, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As per nominator. Would not be against new subjects having only one of the three top tier fights required for WP:MMANOT but it would have to be recently active and a win since there is a good chance of them making the requirement in the relatively near future. However in this case the single fight was a loss meaning the chance of meeting WP:MMANOT in future is significantly lower.Peter Rehse (talk) 13:03, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:38, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notable in Finland and the US with sources. Strawberrie Fields (talk) 21:25, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As a brand new editor you might want to get to know basic Wikipedia policies such as WP:GNG, WP:N, and WP:RS. For example, routine coverage such as results, announcements, and press releases don't count as significant coverage. Jakejr (talk) 01:49, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NMMA and WP:GNG. It's possible she may get her top 3 fights, but right now she only has 1. I have no objection to someone recreating the article if and when she meets WP:NMMA. Papaursa (talk) 20:18, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:51, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As above. J 1982 (talk) 16:36, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

note to closing admin J 1982 (talk · contribs) has made a spree of 23 identical keep as above !votes in 29 minutes. LibStar (talk) 12:24, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Doesn't meet either WP:NMMA or WP:GNG. Neither of the keep votes shows she meets any notability standards and the burden of proof is on them.Mdtemp (talk) 14:09, 19 August 2014 (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.