Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tyson Nam

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. The general opinion here is that this individual has received just about enough non-routine coverage to be considered notable. The consensus is not particularly strong, though, as it's clear it's not entirely agreed as to what constitutes routine coverage in this context. ~ mazca ^talk 13:39, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tyson Nam[edit]

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

MMA fighter with no top tier fights and only routine sports reporting for coverage so he fails both WP:NMMA and WP:GNG.Mdtemp (talk) 16:05, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:08, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:08, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:08, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Gained notability through the contract controversy with Bellator and his top ten ranking in the Bantamweight division. Most of his references are, in fact, not routine sports coverage. Clearly passes WP:GNG. Luchuslu (talk) 13:46, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The references are either routine sports or BLP1E since they're about his contract dispute.Mdtemp (talk) 17:11, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The contract dispute is just one facet of his notability. WP:BLP1E is for non-notable people who happen to be in a single news cycle for their participation in a single event. He's also notable for his victory over a top-tier organizations' champion (Eduardo Dantas) and his nine or so months as a top ten ranked fighter. Just look on Google News and you'll see plenty of non-trivial stories, interviews, bios etc. Luchuslu (talk) 18:22, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 01:21, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete Doesn't meet any notability standards, coverage seems routine (except for contract dispute).204.126.132.231 (talk) 17:46, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:GNG. Entity of the Void (talk) 21:20, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep I'm suggesting a weak keep simply because I heard that he was ranked in the top 10 in his division after he KO'd Bellator's champion, now I can't verify this but if someone can prove it to be true then him once ranking in the top 10 is just as strong as him taking 3 fights for a top tier fighter. Add it to the page as well and state it on this page otherwise no-one can review their opinion on it. 109.156.233.119 (talk) 15:43, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Subjective ratings are not the best way to determine notability, especially when other criteria already exist. I don't think Nam actually meets any of the existing notability criteria, but he has some things that support notability claims. There is some non-routine coverage of him (regarding his contract dispute) and he did defeat Bellator's reigning world champion (albeit in a non-title bout). Papaursa (talk) 17:43, 4 July 2013 (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.