Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karalina Tjapko

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. Secret ^account 17:49, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Karalina Tjapko[edit]

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

Non-notable wrestler, just competing at a tournament is not enough. Peter Rehse (talk) 14:18, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 14:24, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 14:24, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Latvia-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 14:24, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:47, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Meets WP:SPORTCRIT which states "[t]he guidelines on this page are intended to reflect the fact that sports figures are likely to meet Wikipedia's basic standards of inclusion if they have, for example, participated in a major international amateur or professional competition at the highest level (such as the Olympics)." Competed at 2013 World Championships (now stated in the article) which is a major international competition at the highest level. Thus the presumption of notability exists and I see no evidence for that presumption to be overcome. RonSigPi (talk) 03:19, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update - According to this has actually competed in the last 2 world championships (2013 and 2014) [1].RonSigPi (talk) 03:31, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The mere fact that Latvia keeps sending her to the world championships despite her not winning any matches there does not seem sufficient to show notability. It merely shows that she's considered the best female Latvian wrestler in her class and given Latvia's population of 2 million, I'm not sure that's enough. Population wise, that's less than the population of Brooklyn and being the best wrestler in Brooklyn isn't sufficient grounds for notability. There's no qualifying for the world championships, say through continental championships. For example, Kitti Korosi of Hungary lost her first match in the same weight division at the 2013 European championships 7-0 and still appeared at the 2013 world championships. Papaursa (talk) 04:15, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG with no significant coverage--just routine sports results. Also fails WP:MANOTE. Simply showing up is not enough--unless she makes the Olympics. This may just be a case of WP:TOOSOON. Mdtemp (talk) 18:42, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:MANOTE. 204.126.132.231 (talk) 16:11, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A few points. First, its worth pointing out that WP:MANOTE is an essay and not a guideline, similar to WP:CFBCOACH. Second I dont know how one 'fails' WP:MANOTE as it merely shows how notability or deletion are supported. Of a similar note, I dont see how any of the listed points, either for deletion or notability, are relevant for this person and thus dont know how its 'failed'. Third, it seems like the martial arts project wants to expand its reach. Not only a wrestler being claimed as one that the martial arts project has authority over, but even boxing seems to be getting roped in (see deletion discussion for Mickey Goodwin). While one can argue if wrestling and boxing are martial arts, the WP:MANOTE are not written with a wrestler in mind. There is no 'finding of a wrestling style' as would be needed for 2. The 2nd half of 3 states that world champion of an 'organization', but that seems more geared to UFC/Bellator than what is commonly considered a governing body. There are no 'belts' in wrestling as 4 discusses and typically books in an 'art' are not common in wrestling. That leaves 1 and the first part of 3, which would apply to almost any athlete, not specifically a martial artist. I just dont see WP:MANOTE it carrying weight here. That leaves us with WP:GNG and I think as said before WP:SPORTCRIT is met and thus a presumption of GNG applies.RonSigPi (talk) 22:43, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, there's so much wrong with your comment I hardly know where to start. First, you're upset because the two oldest martial arts known to man, boxing and wrestling, are being treated as--martial arts. Then you're saying that MANOTE obviously can't apply to wrestlers because they can't meet the criteria--and you list the fact that they don't compete for major organizations or medals. Then what is FILA and the medals they award? You say MANOTE doesn't apply to Mickey Goodwin, but nowhere in that discussion is MANOTE mentioned. In fact, someone is upset because we used the notability criteria for boxers (NBOX) for--a boxer. Finally, for this discussion there is nothing to show GNG is met. The only sources are links to results and that's not considered significant coverage.Mdtemp (talk) 18:23, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree with what you have said, but am more taken a back by what you said and how it was said. Its time for WP:CIV to rule the day so I will not address your comment substantively. I think I have made my points in a reasonable way and its time for others to speak.RonSigPi (talk) 21:22, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I don't think just appearing at an event is sufficient to show notability and there's no significant independent coverage. If she qualifies for the Olympics she'll be notable, but that's WP:CRYSTALBALL. Papaursa (talk) 20:02, 17 October 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.