User talk:Papaursa

Hi, Papaursa. This is NOT some automated message...it's from a real person by golly! Welcome to Wikipedia! I'm glad you've made an account! Thanks for joining; you're on your way to making some great contributions.

Because I've noticed you've just joined, I wanted to give you a few tips to get you started. If you have any questions, please talk to us. Any questions, nothing is too silly (we've heard them all). The tips below should help you to get started too. Best of luck! JoeSmack ^Talk 23:45, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anybody can edit; just go to an article and edit it. Be Bold, but please don't put silly stuff in - it will be removed very quickly, and will annoy people. Besides that, you shouldn't feel nervous or anything about a good-willed contribution. If you're concerned, talk to us. Play in your user area. For example, create User:Papaursa/test. If you feel nervous, feel free to talk to us. When you're ready, start your first article using the Article Wizard. You don't HAVE to use it, but for your first article it really helps. It should be about something well-known, and it will need references. If you'd like more guidance, you guessed it, talk to us. Good luck with editing; please drop me a line some time on my own talk page. There's lots of information below. Once again, welcome to the fantastic world of Wikipedia! --JoeSmack Talk 23:45, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. If you just feel like poking around, Wikipedia:Help is a good place to start. :)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Euclid D. Farnham. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Mickmaguire (talk) 17:54, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the initiative in updating the Tim Cartmell article according to the AfD discussion. Now the article can be expanded as sourced information becomes available. Cheers, Jezebel'sPonyo^shhh 18:52, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest you use the strike though on your whole comment @ Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryuichi Murata as at the moment it says "keep Subject fails WP:MANOTE" which is a little confusing, especially with the line underneath. --Nate^t/_c 10:38, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Papaursa, I was going to post this message the other day (before you posted on WPMA's discussion page), but didn't get around to it until now. I just wanted to say that I think you are doing good work with the article review. A project like this needs people to keep it going steadily, and I believe you are doing just that. (I contribute when I can, but the article review is not the highest item on my priority list.) Thanks for your work on this. Janggeom (talk) 02:56, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Papaursa, could you teach me about Ivan Titenkov? You had participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ivan Titenkov, aren't you? Doesn't this case correspond to WP:CSD#G4? Thanks! --Akira Kouchiyama 00:37, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It probably does qualify for WP:CSD#G4 since it's still an unreferenced article about the same person. Go ahead and nominate it for speedy deletion. If it fails you can always nominate it as an WP:AFD. Papaursa (talk) 00:43, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind reply! I have watched the argument of this user and an administrator in the Russian Wikipedia. It is almost certain that he has not got permission of files. So I gave priority to tagging the file. Thanks again! --Akira Kouchiyama 03:05, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you flagged Joe Thambu for questionable notability. I'm sure you're aware martial artists tend not to be the subject of formal academic writing until late in life, or after their death. I do know of a number of independent magazine articles I can dig up to establish notability for Joe Thambu. You reckon these will do? Cheers Jls aikido (talk) 06:48, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you can source independent articles that focus on him (rather than just a passing mention), then that will probably be sufficient. WP:GNG says that multiple independent references are necessary, but it doesn't require the sources to be "formal academic writing". If you're going to edit martial arts articles you should take a look at WP:MANOTE. Welcome to Wikipedia and I hope you'll be an active contributer to the martial arts project.

Why don't you have a user page? A blank one will do. Usually when the userid is red ... the user is no longer on wikipedie. But the reason your userid is red is because you have no user page. Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 17:34, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I flagged it because I see nothing notable about the Academy, nor have you given any reasons it's notable. It might be better if you tried to make a page on Chokei Kishaba himself. Papaursa (talk) 17:42, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have made pages for Chokei Kishaba and his younger brother Chogi Kishaba and for Katsuhiko Shinzato and Masami Chinen too. I have given a number of reasons why it is notable. There is actually one reason that I have not given that makes it truly notable because I cannot provide a reference for it because it is qualitative i.e. you have to try it to appreciate it. Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 16:41, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have greatly improved the original article and the other articles you mention are off to a good start. Most of them could use some additional sourcing, but at least there's at least 1 decent source for each. I'm glad you didn't give your "qualitative" reason since it's quite subjective. However, there's nothing wrong with being proud of your style. I have removed the notability tag from the original article. Papaursa (talk) 01:58, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. It would have been awkward to have tried to merge this article in to the Senseis (that would have involved unnecessary repetition). Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 14:39, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I contested the prod on that article. If you look in the history, I started to nom it for AfD back in Feb, but I found a couple of good sources for it. I just haven't gotten around to adding them. I'll try to get to it soon. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:32, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did see your comment, but the only source given wasn't independent and I was wondering what you were referring to. I was just hunting martial arts articles of questionable notability without reliable sourcing and this article qualified. Papaursa (talk) 01:22, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Here are a couple: [1], [2] (about a man who sued because they only teach women), [3], [4] (kind of trivial, but gives some background on it too), [5], [6] (one of the better ones), [7] (about govt funds being used to pay for it), [8], [9], [10], [11]. There are more, but I think this is probably enough to get it past notability :) Niteshift36 (talk) 05:18, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removed tags of speedy deletion on the page. Its a notable article on Martial Arts/Kickboxing project.Marty Rockatansky (talk) 06:02, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed a comment you left on one of the AFDs. I'd be happy to discuss how we can go about establishing some notability guidelines for MMA, if you'd be so happy as to participate. If so (and don't feel obliged btw), what would you recommend we do first? Ideally, I'd want to involve a few people, but that's difficult considering there are very few regular MMA editors on the wiki and a lot of discussion on WP:MMA shut down very quickly due to the lack of participation. Paralympiakos (talk) 15:30, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I find that participating in the martial arts project is pretty time consuming. That said, I'd be willing to put my 2 cents in on MMA notability guidelines. I doubt I'll ever be much of a contributor to MMA articles (I'm not that big a fan), but establishing some guidelines seems like a worthwhile activity. It's clear you and I have different ideas about what makes someone a professional, so perhaps that's a good starting point for discussion. Also, what events are notable--UFC and PRIDE are, what about Strikeforce and WEC? Which European and Asian promotions qualify? Does MMA have to include groundwork? Most people think so, but others would argue any competion that involves multiple traditional martial arts, like sanda, would qualify. I also feel that the results of every event don't need their own article. Papaursa (talk) 15:46, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, that's fair enough if you're not a big fan, but if you're willing to help and discuss, that would be a big benefit. I'm going to start a discussion at WP:MMA in about 10 minutes. Just bear with me whilst I verbalise my thoughts. Paralympiakos (talk) 15:48, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Papaursa. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Tristão da Cunha (aikidoka), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. According to the article, he "introduced traditional aikido in Portugal". Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 23:08, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Papaursa. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Fumio Akimoto, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. According to the article, he attained the highest rank of his day. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 05:23, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you BLPPRODded Fabiano Scherner as a new unreferenced BLP. I did some checking and discovered that the article was not newly created; in fact, it has been here since May 2008. The page was therefore not eligible to be BLPPRODded, since it is only intended to be used on articles created after March 18, 2010. With this in mind, I removed the tag. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:58, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, that was my error. I must have looked at the bottom of the history page and thought that was the only page. Papaursa (talk) 22:01, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Black belt magazine has released archives of many of their back issues see here [12] it may help in getting reliable information of the less well covered martial artists and thinks such as fight records. Dwanyewest (talk) 15:03, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I went to start the AFD on this article Michael Moreno from the week of May 19th. I was surprised at the number of references and the claims "He is the chief instructor of American Aikikai Federation as well as one of its founders.[12][13][1][5][14] and is the chairman and technical director of Federacion Mexicana de Aikido [15][16][17][18][19] [20][21][10][3]".

This article has been speedied and restored 4 times. It has survived one AFD Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Michael_Moreno.

Although the notability is borderline, I don't think the article is clearly fluff. Could I ask you to put it up for AFD? Thanks! jmcw (talk) 11:13, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

		The Martial Arts Barnstar
		I, Janggeom (talk), hereby award Papaursa the Martial Arts Barnstar for valued contributions to WikiProject Martial Arts. Your contributions in the Article Review have helped improve Wikipedia significantly. Thank you for your efforts. Awarded 23 July 2010

Thank you. Papaursa (talk) 22:02, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Papaursa. I couldn't help noticing your concern over the use of the WP:BLPPROD. I would just like to confirm WereSpielChequers' reply to you. We both took place in the long discussions that developed it. the rule, strange as it seems, is simple:

• If there are any links anywhere on the page to anywhere (except another Wikipedia page) that mention the subject, then the BLPPROD annot be used.
• Any single WP:RS reliable source that is added to the page is enough to allow removal of the BLPPROD. This does however still leave the article open to the possiblity of a standard WP:PROD, or being sent to WP:AfD.

Not all the people who helped developed the policy were happy with the outcome, but we have to live with it, at least for the time being. After six months or so of use (around January 2011), the BLPPROD will come up for review again for possible improvement and will be most welcome to voice your opinion there.--Kudpung (talk) 01:10, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the explanation. That's not how I read the policy and I've seen it applied differently so apparently I'm not the only one confused. I wasn't aware of the previous discussion, but hopefully I can contribute when the topic comes up again. Papaursa (talk) 23:34, 25 October 2010 (UTC)h[reply]

It's understandable. When policies that have been crafted finally get drafted, what results is often a bit confusing. The previous RfC was huge, it took several months and at the beginning over 400 editors participated. About ten or fifteen editors did the final mopping up and conluding the consensus that was reached. There's also the fact that some people don't agree with our policies and simply do whatever they want. It gets put right of course. --Kudpung (talk) 02:41, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In June you PRODded this, and it was deleted. Undeletion has now been requested at WP:REFUND so per WP:DEL#Proposed deletion I have restored it, and now notify you in case you wish to consider taking it to AfD. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:56, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - you recently added some text some text talking about notability outline and that I need references. This is the first stand topic I have ever created so I would appreciate some more specific info on what you consider a good reference. As far as I can see the SuperLeague website is the most reliable reference out there and most of my page relies on information on their rules, fighters and event results. I have created a large number of pages related to SuperLeague, so I would really not want it to all be deleted. Thanks. jsmith006 (talk) 16:20, 03 January 2010

Congratulations on your first new article. The SuperLeague website is not considered a good reference because it is not independent of the topic. I suggest you look at WP:RS to get a better understanding of what makes a good source. The primary tag that I inserted shows that the article has no independent sources and that is a requirement if you don't want to see your article deleted (see WP:V). I did see you created articles on their events and I believe they should be removed. That's my personal opinion based on WP:N which states that "routine news coverage such as press releases, public announcements, sports coverage" is not considered notable and that's all those event pages are. I know I've thrown a lot at you, but you need to understand the Wikipedia policies that other editors wiil apply when they look at your article. If you have questions, let me know. You can also post them on the talk page of the martial arts project Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Martial arts. Hope this is helpful to you. Papaursa (talk) 23:32, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've added some additional references for the main SuperLeague page and I will add additional references for each event where possible. I have still seen plenty of wikipedia articles which use the same sort of referencing that I have used which in turn have not had tags added but will try and get it sorted. Thanks for your help. jsmith006 (talk) 10:16, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It still seems to lack independent sources--just press releases and the organization's web page. You're right that other articles exist with poor sourcing (or none at all), but that doesn't make it correct or prevent them from being deleted if someone wants to. Papaursa (talk) 23:34, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While I appreciate your concerns with the SuperLeague page and agree that it could be better referenced it’s official website seems a good source (I agree it could be biased in favour of the organization but I do not see how listing details of events, rules etc affects this). In terms of other articles I notice that a lot of the K-1 pages (many of which I have contributed to - urghh) use the K-1 official website for a large proportion of information – does this mean that the majority of the K-1 results pages should be considered for deletion? In terms of SuperLeague results I have added as much external information (i.e. non SuperLeague affiliated information) as I can i.e. Iron Life Magazine etc – is this okay or is this not considered an independent source? I feel that when listing results of sports pages the best way of doing so is using sports articles as it is a sport that we are discussing - how else I can get information on events and the results? I felt that the advantage of Wikipedia over other websites was that all the different kickboxing organizations, their events , fighters etc can be interconnected and also that other users can add to existing articles (or correct if need be). It was only a lack of information on events that inspired me to start creating Wikipedia pages in the first place. I agree that if information is totally incorrect or obscure, badly written or obscene, then it should be removed, but I do not feel that any of these factors affect the pages I have created. On the other hand I appreciate your feedback and want to get articles as accurate as I possibly can. Thanks. jsmith006 (talk) 12:28, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As regards K-1 and MMA--if I were king I would delete most (if not all) of the individual event websites. However, I know this would be met with bitter resistance and so I don't bother to try, even though I believe WP policy would support me. I had a signficant role in drafting the MMA notability rules (WP:MMANOT), so I have some idea of what will and will not be supported. I agree with WP's advantage of linking things, but I doubt you'll ever convince me that individual events pass WP:N. I do appreciate your efforts to make the articles well referenced. I would also claim that the fact that the league went bankrupt quickly would argue against its notability (and especially against the notability of its individual events) since it obviously didn't generate enough interest to survive. Papaursa (talk) 00:18, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok while we'll agree to disagree about the events pages (which I think are extremely important) you have put across your points well and in a considerate manner - so thank you for that. As far as SuperLeague is concerned the amount of TV interest in the organization and the calibre of some of the fighters involved in events such as Albert Kraus, Dmitry Shakuta, John Wayne Parr et al, suggests that it was on its way to being a real player on the kickboxing global circuit (I'm thinking that European events would have finally branched out to global if it had keep its momentum). I guess over reliance on one key sponsor spelt the end of the organization, which only being three years old had not got the brand regonition that other organizations like K-1, plus global recession blah blah blah. I'll keep trying to get the information and turn this thing around. I believe that the fight reports (I know you don't like em) are okay as I have used a variety of sources but the main page will need work. If you have the time I would really appreciate some concrete examples of what you consider a good source (just link me to a page that you know uses them or an external link would do). Thanks.jsmith006 (talk) 11:20, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've been around long enough to see a lot of good ideas and fighters involved with organizations that died early on (e.g., Chuck Norris's World Combat League) and this appears to be another one. I would say you need to make sure the main article can withstand a deletion challenge, because if it is deleted there is no way to claim the individual events are notable. As far as good sources go, I'll refer you to WP:RS. Some examples of good sources would be the New York Times reporting on how the SuperLeague is a huge hit in Europe or a book describing it as a significant Muay Thai organization. Make sure they're published by a well regarded publisher or organization. With the growth of vanity publishers this has become more important. People or organizations directly connected to the subject are never considered reliable sources. That doesn't mean you can't use them, but if you can't find independent sources then your article has a good chance of getting deleted. Hope this helps. Papaursa (talk) 20:54, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note that I undeleted this article per a request at WP:REFUND by the article's creator. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 16:21, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Papaursa, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Chuck Jeffreys to a proposed deletion tag. The speedy deletion criteria are extremely narrow to protect the encyclopedia, and do not fit the page in question. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Dusti^*poke* 06:51, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Papaursa. I'm new to Wikipedia. Could you please explain why you added the notability tag to the article Kung Fu To'a again, although on the discussion page other users have confirmed that the style can be considered notable? Thanks for helping. Drindy (talk) 11:18, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The notability tag was added because the article gives no independent sources that talk about this style. To be considered notable for Wikipedia requires significant coverage by sources that are not connected to the subject of the article. I suggest you look at the notability guidelines at WP:N. Comments by users do not prove notability. Papaursa (talk) 05:06, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I do not believe that is still an active organization. I think that it split into 2 groups about 10 years ago when the founder died. That said, Black Belt Magazine and Inside Kung Fu gave Remy and IMAF a lot of writeups in the 70's and 80's. I'll see what I can find tonight.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 22:06, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Both groups claim to be the true successors of Remy Presas and I couldn't find any independent sources. I'm thinking this article should be merged into Remy Presas. Papaursa (talk) 22:11, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That would be my reccomendation, it's not like it was an organization that was around for several hundred years. I'll see what I can find to source it, and we can roll it into his article if it doesn't seem notable enough to stand on its own.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 23:09, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Brandon Hunt · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

Just a heads up that I restored this per a request at WP:REFUND. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:04, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification. I have put the article up for AfD. Papaursa (talk) 01:44, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The page Master Fighters Championship looks like it may be a valid CSD, but I prefer not to delete a page unless the creator has been notified. I understand that sometimes automated tools fail to do the notification for some reason. Not sure if that was the case, but could you make the notification?SPhilbrickT 18:25, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He's been notified and given my reasons. I also pointed him to the MMA notability guidelines (WP:MMANOT). Papaursa (talk) 18:32, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This series of pages was created before this thing blew up (I had everything in Sandbox and had already created main page). I was a bit bad and did another page (WAKO Varna) but take your point. If I create anything new it'll be fighter pages or upcoming It's Showtime events. I agree that creating pages like this could probably inflame situation so thanks for your advice. Enjoy the day. jsmith006 (talk) 06:47, 6 July 2011

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Genbukan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Genbukan until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. jmcw (talk) 09:17, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Past AfD's have indicated that just having a world title "fight" does not confer notability, so the article sill needs better sourcing. Mtking ^(edits) 22:11, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I removed the notability tag because I believe the event to be notable (a world title fight for the planet's major professional kickboxing organization), but I didn't remove the reference tag. It clearly needs better sources. Papaursa (talk) 22:15, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think BigzMMA should be reported to the ANI? I've never posted there, but it seems like he's getting more belligerent and starting to make threats. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Astudent0 (talk • contribs) 17:59, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I decided to go ahead and report him. Astudent0 (talk) 18:24, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously go get a life mate, I'm just trying to help expand knowledge of a promotion of my favourite sport slightly, what is your goal in what your doing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BigzMMA (talk • contribs) 11:16, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, I want to let you know that I am sorry for hurting your feeling before, I hope we can put that behind us and look forwards, not backwards. With that said, I see a lot has happened since I was last able to edit on Wikipedia, many of it I am not pleased at all with. So with that I want to talk to you about some things that I not only disagree with, but would like to see reinstated pronto.

I will address many of the fighter pages that I created that were deleted within the two weeks I was away. Now there were only really four pages that I was really shocked about seeing deleted, which were Tim Newman, Reagan Penn, Jamaine Facey and Jake Bostwick, as they all match Wikipedia's MMA notability criteria.

Tim Newman has already fought for BAMMA to two occasions, which were BAMMA 4 and BAMMA 5, and he is scheduled to fight on the BAMMA 8 card, all of which have links supporting this. So even thought he has only technically fought for BAMMA twice, because he is clearly a true member of the BAMMA roster, and unless something happens to him which means he cannot compete at BAMMA 8, I find that deleting his Wikipedia page was a massive error for everyone who participated in that debate, as everyone who did should of been looking for sources relating to this person to see if he was scheduled for another fight with the promotion.

With Reagan Penn, he doesn't necessary need the sympathy factor for being BJ Penn, as he is currently competing for ProElite, which as we know is a second tier MMA organisation, as they were the same people who have created EliteXC, and everyone agrees that with the attention ProElite are getting now that they are a second tier organisation, so that means that the only thing Penn is missing is a thrid fight under them, and telling by how excited ProElite are having a Penn fighting for them I'd imagine that he will get another fight for them, possibly for the next card, so that means that deleting his Wikipedia card can be seen as being premature, as if he decided to retire after his second bout then fair enough, but he hasn't so far so once again another blunder for those who participated in that debate.

Finally we have Jamaine Facey and Jake Bostwick. Now these two guys have competed for Cage Rage and Cage Rage UK, both second tier organisations. They both fought on the main cards of Cage Rage on one or two occasions, and competed for the contender cards at least three times each, which means they were already deserving of their positions on here. They are always competing on the main cards of Cage Rage UK which, again, means that the still deserve their spots on here. So for another blunder I would like to see all FOUR men have their pages reinstated as soon as possible.

I also noticed that Dean Amasinger has had his page merged with the The Ultimate Fighter page, which I completely disagree with. Dean has competed for BAMMA (will have his second bout at BAMMA 8), Cage Warriors (competed for their main cards 3 times), Cage Rage UK (competed for them 5 times), performed at the MMA 1: The Reckoning, which is famous as the first MMA event to happen in Ontario since the official sanctioning of MMA in August of 2010, and to top it all off, he is an Ultimate Fighter Contestant, which, all combined, should allow him his own Wikipedia page. So with this I would like your help to get this page back up on Wikipedia as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BigzMMA (talk • contribs) 12:58, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to end by mentioning something about Cage Rage UK/UCMMA. Now when it was deleted, I don't think anyone who participated in the debate really understood, nor try to looking into it, as you would of seen the promotion is one of the big three in the UK, along side BAMMA and Cage Warriors. I kept saying over and over that UCMMA was created immediately after the demise of Cage Rage, and that it has television time on Sky Sports which, as you may know, is the biggest sporting channel in the United Kingdom, with ESPN trailing behind it. so already there is some legitimacy with that. They also show their talk show 'Cage Fighter' every week on Sky Sports 3. I do admit finding coverage outside of the promotion on the events is tricky but they show their events on tape delay from the night it's shown and aired it on Wednesday evening, which covers the timeslot of where their 'Cage Fighter' show, which will mean that the day after it is aired there will be reliable, independent coverage online, visible for anyone and everyone to see. Now I hope you take this into consideration and help me put it back on here, where it always belongs. (BigzMMA 12:10, 13 November 2011 (UTC))

I have decided that due to your dismissal of anything mentioned by myself in a place you have illegal binding control over, and your lack of fair co-operation with myself and other users through WT:MMANOT and WP:MMANOT, I have reported you to ANI, I was instructed to write to you to make you aware of the situation so that you may be able to defend yourself. Good luck with your case. Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "WP:MMANOT, WT:MMANOT". Thank you. --BigzMMA 12:26, 23 November 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BigzMMA (talk • contribs)

Please come participate in the discussion about the MMA Notability guideline that BigzMMA has listed you as a disputant on. Hasteur (talk) 18:05, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because this was your nomination, it seems reasonable to notify you, just like the closing admin, that I'm unhappy with the way the outcome was gauged. See Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 November 29. BusterD (talk) 23:13, 29 November 2011 (UTC) [reply]

Because you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SuperKombat (2nd nomination), you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SuperKombat (3rd nomination). Cunard (talk) 06:53, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Papaursa for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. TreyGeek (talk) 01:36, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for defending me. I just signed on and saw the notice. Deleting MMA articles really POs the fanboys, doesn't it? Astudent0 (talk) 19:00, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't delete just for the sake of deleting. I delete articles that don't show notability or have good sources. Papaursa (talk) 01:41, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think of List of United Glory events? Looks like another "Kickboxing events of 2011" article that was deleted. I'm not familiar enough with Kickboxing to be for sure. I am amused by the circular links on that page though. --TreyGeek (talk) 01:58, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is another attempt to get those same articles on Wikipedia. I see there are also similiar things in the "List of It's Showtime events" and the "List of K-1 events". I think these efforts call for a comment at WP:ANI. Papaursa (talk) 23:48, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon me for noticing this thread and butting in. To my view, it's the relentlessly shameless promotional nature of these pages which offends. I would have no problem seeing all this stuff developed on the Edge MMA wiki, but I can't see how these events poorly supported by sources can pass the bars of NOTNEWSPAPER and ROUTINE. These pages (like all the others) were created by a set of SPAs who soon will get blocked for socking, based on all the history to date. BusterD (talk) 00:09, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I hope to see your comments at the ANI section I started on user Thai Striker. Papaursa (talk) 00:14, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I created an AfD for the Lists of Glory Events and It's Showtime Events. I didn't see the ANI started until afterwards (though I did just toss my two cents into the ANI). I did not nominate List of K-1 Events because it looks like an honest list of events, as opposed to the 'cram as many non-notable event articles into one article' attempt like the other two are. We'll see where it goes. --TreyGeek (talk) 04:34, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like Thai Striker (talk · contribs) is WölffReik (talk · contribs) and that Thai Land F (talk · contribs) is Cyperuspapyrus (talk · contribs) (an account I had never heard of). I guess in the future, if we see WP:DUCKS we should automatically report them rather than hassle with AfDs and vandalism reports? Thanks for taking this to ANI, I was hesitant to do so; I suppose I was WP:AGF too much. --TreyGeek (talk) 08:37, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I believe in AGF, but not with users who have repeatedly violated WP policies. I think it's clear we need to be vigilant when it concerns kickboxing articles. Papaursa (talk) 21:22, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The closing admin of the Glory Events article and I tossed a couple messages back and forth. Now that It's Showtime is a proper list, I've withdrawn the AfD. Since the Glory Events AfD is closed I don't think any other action is needed. Now on to a vandalism search and possibly run MMABot for the first time in more than a week. -TreyGeek (talk) 21:45, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FYI someone is trying to paste the contents of an article you nominated for deletion into the main list article. if it's notable, it should have its own article. however, it appears from the result of the AfD (which you initiated), it's been decided that its not notable. just thought you might want to know, and watch for this sort of stuff. Frietjes (talk) 00:07, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I have started a thread at WP:ANI about these actions by Thai Striker (see my response to TreyGeek above). Please feel free to comment there. Papaursa (talk) 00:12, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SFL 1, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SFL 1 (2nd nomination). BigzMMA (talk) 09:21, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Papaursa. Just to let you know, I declined the A7 speedy you suggested for this article, as there appears to be some coverage in third-party sources. Regards, Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 17:47, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I saw thay you previously had commented on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SFL 1 (2nd nomination). I wanted to draw your attention to the Articles for Discussion occuring currently. You may find it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SFL 2. Please feel free to comment. Hasteur (talk) 15:14, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Based on your previous interactions, I thought you might be interested in WP:AN#Request for Sanctions against User:BigzMMA. Hasteur (talk) 12:04, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Moni_Aizik is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moni_Aizik_(3rd_nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. jmcw (talk) 07:46, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up. I've looked at that article before and I've never quite been able to come to a conclusion about it. It looks to me like he doesn't meet WP:MANOTE but will qualify under WP:GNG. I agree with Mdtemp's comment that he's not what most people would consider notable, but it's hard to claim there aren't sources that mention him (although we could argue about whether or not there's "significant" coverage). My previous experience with articles that I would have said showed even less notability/coverage (see Danielle Curzon and her AfD, for example) makes me believe that people will support keeping this one. Papaursa (talk) 23:58, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• 
• 
• 

Again, I'm so sorry. I totally got confused and thought you were someone else. Please forgive me. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:43, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FYI. Mtking ^(edits) 06:37, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged a page for Copyvio and it was duely deleted. I actually thought the content was notable but in any case a few days later the page was re-created with you guessed it the same text. I was trying to figure out a way to refer to the first deletion. Thamby Rajah http://www.aikidoshudokan.com/about/thamby-rajah I did drop a note to the page creator.Peter Rehse (talk) 00:49, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seems someone beat me to it. Just not sure what the best way was to avoid cycles of delete and repeat.Peter Rehse (talk) 01:04, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure about Thamby's notability, but I see you've tried to explain things to the article's creator. This appears to be his only editing so far. You might also let him know about finding additional sources and WP:V. It might be that he can use some of the ones given at Joe Thambu. If the article is removed and created again, the easiest thing might be to rewrite the article if you believe it belongs on WP. Papaursa (talk) 02:38, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was notified that the Robert Visitacion page was deleted last month. After a few clicks I found the reason being was 'no references'. What references would you like? I can probably supply you with any references or contacts you need. just let me know. Thanks, 6-25-12 (71.11.233.113 (talk) 03:14, 26 June 2012 (UTC))

Papaursa (talk · contribs) nominated Robert Visitacion for deletion. I didn't. An article will need citations from reliable sources (published articles from reputable media such as newspapers, books, etc.). Sites like IMDb are not considered reliable. The editors who voted at the deletion discussion did not find any reliable source coverage to support an article. • Gene93k (talk) 11:45, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello Papaursa, Hope all is well. as you can read above I am inquiring about a page that was deleted. Which subjects do you references for? If you can give me a list, I can supply you with references or contacts. Thanks, 6-26-12

As Gene93k noted above, there were no independent reliable sources for any claims in the Robert Visitacion article. ALL claims need to be supported by sources that are independent of the subject and have "a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." You can get more detailed explanations about verifiability at WP:V and about reliable sources at WP:RS. Beyond that there were questions about whether he was actually notable. He didn't seem to meet the notability criteria for martial artitsts given at WP:MANOTE. The now dormant kickboxing task force said "A kickboxing athlete is presumed notable if the person has actively participated in a major international professional competition at the highest level, such as K-1." Visitacion didn't meet that standard, either. The bottom line is that an athlete has to be notable and have reliable independent sources to verify that notability. Hope this helps. Papaursa (talk) 21:52, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have noticed you have added a notability Tag to this article, I would appreciate it if you could elaborate and help me improve it, as other admins have helped me and told me that it met the requirements and was acceptable as it is. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hjc2012 (talk • contribs) 2012-06-27T08:27:45‎

You're already in a discussion thread about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Martial arts#Cheongye Kwan. I would say that is the proper place for a discussion on both the art and the founder. Papaursa (talk) 21:39, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• It looks like this is Hjc2012's first article. While this tag mentions deletion, its main purpose is to pledge for adding secondary (third-party) sources, and the article is in no deletion queues. What we will probably want is to check whether there are any secondary sources on the subject, and raise a discussion at the article talk page. Thanks! --Gryllida 13:47, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Gryllida, nice to see a positive remark for a change instead of remarks of delete like certain other users. hjc2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.22.243.160 (talk) 07:29, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Martial Arts for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 01:12, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I found the case made for the whole promotion was marginal but I thought it better to fry the spawn than the fish. Probably there is more coverage out there in French sources. We could go AfD for it again I suppose but if it is the major promotion for French MT and Kickboxing than it probably should survive. I suggest we leave it be for some time.Peter Rehse (talk) 05:21, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Is that article good now, when I have added some reliable sources?

ArkadiuszEurope (talk) 23:34, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

None of those sources are anything but routine sports coverage (see WP:ROUTINE), so they aren't enough to show notability. The real problem is that he doesn't seem to meet any notability criteria. Papaursa (talk) 05:12, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For being able to stay above the fray of the MMA domain drama and work towards getting things done.

TreyGeek (talk) 04:10, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I want to be helpful, but the abuse I get is causing me to take more frequent WP breaks. Papaursa (talk) 19:54, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unless you're going to nominate all articles about national associations for Olympic sports in Canada for deletion, you might want to consider removing the tags you just added to Judo Canada. CanadianJudoka (talk) 03:34, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't nominated it for deletion. When the only reference for the article is the subject's own website, that doesn't show notability and does show that it needs additional references. Fix the problems and the tags can be removed. Papaursa (talk) 03:53, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's also a book, but yes, as a stub, it does not have many sources. Claiming that it lacks notability, though, shows that you didn't even bother to check into it yourself. I just looked at your edit history, and I really think that it would be more helpful to Wikipedia if you tried to improve articles that you find lacking, instead of just tagging everything as unsatisfactory. CanadianJudoka (talk) 04:16, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would improve Wikipedia if people followed WP:BURDEN and wrote sourced articles instead of the hundreds of articles I see whose entire content is "___ is a _____ from ____". I do try to improve some articles, but it's not my fault if some editors are too lazy to source their articles or check notability criteria. We all try to improve WP in our own way. Notice that the Judo Canada article has been improved because of my actions. Papaursa (talk) 22:01, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for helping to make MMA articles on wikipedia better! In September 168 people made a total of 956 edits to MMA articles. I noticed you havn't listed yourself on the WikiProject Mixed martial arts Participants page. Take a look, sign up, and don't forget to say hi on the talk page. Kevlar (talk) 04:54, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I am finishing article Enrique Álvarez Félix. He was an actor. There are rumours about his homosexuality. Should I mention this in his article?--Miha (talk) 15:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you can mention it, but only if you have sources that support that statement. Without good supporting documentation, I would recommend you leave it out of the article. Papaursa (talk) 00:57, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Call me sensitive but if I AfD it I would be just mean. I was insisting on references and I suppose they were added but the author just keeps removing tags for multiple issues. Opinion?Peter Rehse (talk) 15:38, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I think you should AfD it. It has an obvious COI and no real claim to notability. Every martial artist who teaches (even BJJ) is not notable. His rank doesn't show notability and he can't inherit notability from his students, so what makes him notable? Papaursa (talk) 00:40, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I know. Same issue with Ionuţ Atodiresei. Actually might be notable but I am getting tired with reverting his removal of BLP PROD.Peter Rehse (talk) 03:06, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just reverted the last removal of the BLPPROD tag. If he does it again, perhaps you should report it to ANI. Leaving messages on his talk page doesn't seem to work--he simply blanks the page. Papaursa (talk) 16:37, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, i'm sorry , can you halp me about Ionuţ Atodiresei — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kristtty (talk • contribs) 17:31, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia policy says that a subject must have "received significant coverage in reliable sources" to be considered notable. Atodiresei's article has no sources. Significant coverage means something more than a one line mention, and routine coverage (like simply giving a sports result) doesn't count. Routine coverage is discussed at WP:ROUTINE while reliable sources are discussed at WP:RS. Reliable sources would include non-routine coverage from newspapers or magazines, for example. However, things like blogs, personal websites, Youtube, information put out by the promotion he's fighting for, or information from where he trains, works, or teaches would not be considered reliable because they're not independent from him. You need to find at least one independent source before you can remove the BLP PROD tag that is on the article. Please let me know if you have additional questions. Papaursa (talk) 17:51, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I finde 3 soure [[13]][[14]] [[15]] not very much, in romanian. And 12 fights on YouTube [[16]][[17]] [[18]][[19]][[20]],end training [[21]][[22]][[23]] i couden't fide eniting in english,please, help me with te rest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kristtty (talk • contribs) 20:53, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As I said before, the youtube videos aren't acceptable as reliable sources. I couldn't find anything in English, but I did see he was mentioned in a number of articles in Romanian. I only looked at a few, but I'm not sure there was significant independent coverage since I had a language problem and trouble determining sources. I saw a couple of short interviews and an article about him driving a stolen car. What would be good is if you could find some press coverage of him winning the WKN European championship or his WAKO-PRO title. While neither of those were world championships, sourcing some press coverage of those fights where it says he won those titles, would be enough to have the unsourced tag removed. Papaursa (talk) 17:47, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

how about [[24]] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kristtty (talk • contribs) 17:48, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but a one line mention in a press release saying he's going to be fighting someone in an upcoming event is strictly routine coverage. Was there no press coverage of his championship fights? You need to give some evidence that he's a notable fighter (as defined by Wikipedia standards). Papaursa (talk) 01:14, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Papaursa, Thank you for your helpful insights on the Liu Wanchuan article. I have updated the introductory paragraphs to highlight the importance of Liu Wanchuan to the art of Baguazhang and Chinese internal martial arts, and will continue to update the remaining article in the coming days. As far as independent resources I have contacted the current lineage holder Li Baohua today to see if he can provide any newspaper or book mentions of Liu Wanchuan for use as references in the article. OpenMind 16:18, 5 November 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by OpenMind (talk • contribs)

If you can find some independent sources, then I think the article will be fine. The problem is that none of the current sources are independent from the organization and WP:N requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Papaursa (talk) 02:16, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello I cited Joe Lansdale's induction into the United States Martial Arts Hall of Fame as Soke in 2011. It also lists his induction in the IMAHOF. PKDASD (talk) 19:44, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It just needed to be clarified since there is no "The Martial Arts Hall of Fame". Papaursa (talk) 00:55, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to join the discussion at WT:MMA#MMA_Event_Notability. Kevlar (talk) 19:04, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A wiki-break - that is a really good idea. Thanks for the heads up and enjoy.Peter Rehse (talk) 00:59, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Papaursa, given you now indicated that you want the article which you nominated to be kept if your intention is to withdraw it's probably best that you explicitly state that within the AfD itself so it can be closed as there is no existing delete votes. Regards ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 18:12, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've been crazy busy this week, so this is the first time I've been on. I see the discussion has already been closed. For future reference, can you tell me exactly what I need to do to withdraw a nomination? Thanks. Papaursa (talk) 18:24, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just write something like this in a deletion discussion: (Withdraw – I liked to withdraw this nomination followed by your reason) would be perfect. Best wishes. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 18:34, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would do it but am caught in the middle of a move from China to the UK. Only by chance I got your message. No guarantee I will get around to it soon.Peter Rehse (talk) 18:11, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that's no little move! Good luck with that. Frankly, I was going to modify the article myself, but my MMA experiences have made me somewhat gun shy. I thought redirecting the one line article on Richie Vaculik was straightforward, but even that was reverted. Papaursa (talk) 19:51, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - lets see how long it lasts.Peter Rehse (talk) 16:12, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back, hope your move went well. Your edit didn't last long, but I have restored your version. We'll see what happens next. Papaursa (talk) 19:27, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I see you contested its creation before. I want to re-create this article but until then it would be better for the users to discuss somewhere if the organization is notable enough. It has grown a lot and considering Glory is registered now in Singapore it is the best promotion in Europe. Please be fair, open somewhere a topic about it and try to stick objective. Right now the SK has tryouts all over the world including in Columbus and organizes K-1 events. I know you try to become moderator but things changed and the kickboxing fans want this. Best regards Zwanenburgwal (talk) 19:50, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't about what kickboxing fans want or don't want--it's about creating a Wikipedia article that meets the requirements. I haven't tried to become a moderator (whatever you think that means), I'm just an editor like everyone else. I have nothing against SuperKombat. All you need do is write an article that shows the organization is notable and has significant, independent coverage. That doesn't mean just creating a list of events or just giving results or announcing fights--all of that is routine sports coverage that doesn't show notability. You're a new editor so I suggest you read WP:N, WP:RS, WP:V, and WP:ROUTINE. Good luck. Papaursa (talk) 23:59, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Can you please then create the article for me? I will continue from there. To see some generalities, how it should look. Thanks. Zwanenburgwal (talk) 17:55, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have no desire to create the article. I would suggest you create the article in your sandbox, but first read Wikipedia:Starting an article. It might help you to look at some related existing articles so that you get an idea of what's required. Once you've got a draft done, I'd be willing to look at it and make comments. Papaursa (talk) 23:23, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

		The Special Barnstar
		You deserve some recognition for all the good work that you do for WP:MMA, especially in light of all the unjustified abuse you took last year. I may not always agree with you, but the project is better because you're a part of it. CaSJer (talk) 21:56, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the kind words. Papaursa (talk) 23:08, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

might want to take a look at this since your so adamant in deleting articles.....World Elite mma championship. - Sepulwiki

I've taken it to AfD. The same user has also created Hamza Rizki which though they claim a kickboxing background, I cannot find anything about them. I've simply tagged the BLP as unsourced and of questionable notability for now. If sourced it has a better chance of surviving AfD than the event article. --TreyGeek (talk) 13:25, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly believe this is a hoax. Cat Zingano was in the hospital for surgery, fighters from different organizations fighting each other (Kimbo Slice, really?), and Rizki's supposed opponent Bibiano Fernandes is fighting for One FC tomorrow. This looks more like an elaborate hoax/puff piece for Rizki. Papaursa (talk) 20:01, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've been looking off and on today and there is very little out there. The Rizki article was updated earlier with a few links to articles about Fernandes getting a loss to Rizki. So it's not a total ghost of an event, but it is odd how little coverage there has been if it is a legit MMA event. --TreyGeek (talk) 20:29, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The fights supposedly were on a Wed. and does it seem likely that Fernandes would schedule fights 2 weeks apart? It seems fishy to me and I'm going to put the Rizki article up for AfD. Papaursa (talk) 20:58, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

He's scheduled to make his third top-tier bout for the UFC (UFC Fight Night: Condit vs. Kampmann 2) today. I did it after the weigh-ins, thought it was reasonable to assume that the fight was 100% confirmed. Poison Whiskey 21:10, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update. Papaursa (talk) 21:16, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I userfied, improved, and resubmitted the article and am wondering if there is anything else that you see that should be done to the article. CrazyAces489 (talk) 03:25, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What the article really needs is to meet WP:GNG and that requires some significant coverage from reliable and independent sources. The problem with the original article was that the sources only mentioned him in passing. Papaursa (talk) 18:29, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm on it.Peter Rehse (talk) 15:29, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Papausa I am pleased you know of GM Frank.

I am a novice in wiki.

Can you advise and adjust accordingly. Thanks very much. Kind rgds

Antonioyap (talk) 19:49, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Papaursa Thank you for helping me. I really appreciate it. How do I now remove the deletion status from the article? Is there anything i can do further or should I just wait.

Thank you Sir. Antonioyap (talk) 16:51, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unless you have some other significant coverage of him that you can add to the article, just wait until the AfD is closed. You should never remove an AfD notice from an article because the administrators will take care of that when the discussion ends. Papaursa (talk) 00:32, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am taking another stab at this one but unlike your Redirect I am going for AfD. In fact there never was an up-rising but rather an attempt to exert control.Peter Rehse (talk) 16:56, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am willing to let the AfD take its course and yes all may be deleted but I meant all articles except Kiatsu be merged into Kenjiro Yoshigasaki. Kiatsu should be deleted.Peter Rehse (talk) 09:04, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have added new footnotes and inline references. How we can close the AfD discussion to merge all(Ki No Kenkyukai Int Assc, Kenkodo) articles to Kenjiro Yoshigasaki?

(Kiaikido1 (talk) 23:07, 22 December 2013 (UTC))[reply]

I still have concerns--see my comments at the AfD discussion. Papaursa (talk) 02:00, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For our spirited debate in that recent AfD. Although we hold differing views, we are ultimately working toward the same essential end, no? :) Buddy23Lee (talk) 22:08, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It was nice to have a debate that stayed civil and focused on the issues. To answer your question, I believe we both are working to improve Wikipedia, although from different viewpoints (at least in this case). Papaursa (talk) 01:09, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For sure, I'm glad you could see that. Although I'll always argue vehemently to support my perspective, it's never emotional and with much respect to the other side. You clearly do a lot of hard work around here. As it would seem your side was the prevailing one in our AfD, I'll try be a bit more conservative about any future article inclusions that seem questionable on notability. Hopefully we'll be on the same side of the next one. Buddy23Lee (talk) 07:47, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since I am a controvesial person on Wikipedia what do you think of Ralph Castellanos being nominated for deletion? Dwanyewest (talk) 15:15, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see much in the way of independent sources, except for the otomix reference (which the article appears to be a direct copy of). You can put it up for copyright violation or AfD. As currently written the article doesn't make a compelling case for being kept, although once nominated others may disagree. Don't let being controversial stop you from doing what you think is right--I've taken a lot of heat for my actions on MMA articles. Papaursa (talk) 03:15, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've added new sources and expanded the article. Unfortunately some of the best sources are offline, but I can get you copies through the Resource Exchange if you want to read/view any. The "The Fights of His Life" is very long a feature article of his entire life. -- GreenC 17:41, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You should sign your posts with 4 tildes to clearly identify yourself. That said, I believe that there are now enough good sources to claim Jaco passes GNG. Papaursa (talk) 00:50, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this article was deleted via AFD, but am unsure. [25] I did some major revisions to this article on my userspace. and would like to get it ready for mainspace. Does it need to be reviewed? Additionally, could you transfer it for me. Thank you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CrazyAces489/Jerome_Mackey CrazyAces489 (talk) 08:58, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I checked and you're right--a previous article on him was speedily deleted for lack of notability. When I look at your draft I don't see anything that shows he meets any of the criteria at WP:MANOTE. In fact, he matches the one thing that specifically supports deletion "Only achievement seems to be that they teach an art." That's just my opinion of course. Papaursa (talk) 21:30, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Understandable, There were several articles about him including Sports Illustrated, Life Magazine, and some court cases. He was the first person to franchise martial arts in the United States. He wasn't big on teaching but seemed to be more about bringing in teachers from other nations to teach at his schools. I guess I need to improve the article some more. CrazyAces489 (talk) 05:14, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think you need to find some articles that really focus on him--not his students or the teachers he brought in because those fall more under WP:NOTINHERITED. You aren't notable simply because you hung around with notable people. Indulging in fraudulent business practices is, sadly, far too common to make one notable (unless you do it on a grand scale like Madoff). Papaursa (talk) 23:49, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is this article ready? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CrazyAces489/Ron_Duncan CrazyAces489 (talk) 18:45, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure. The article was deleted last time because there was a lack of significant coverage in independent sources, despite my keep vote (and addition of the Black Belt magazine article as a source). I'm not seeing much new in this version. You might try posting your question at WP:WPMA or just put it out under "articles for creation." Papaursa (talk) 00:01, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the weak deletes. People stated they wanted more independent sources. I thought I found some. I don't want to put it up and have it deleted as a recreation of a deleted article. So I asked for your opinion. I will get back to work. Thank you. CrazyAces489 (talk) 12:32, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments on the Jon Takagi article. As a new user, I'd like it to be a quality article, but I also note a lack of documentation (and poor articles where they exist) in all the aikido pages I looked at to get started. I'd like to build up wikipedia's resources on aikido, not tear them down. I don't think that the online search source you used <www.ma-mags.com> is helpful here - I tried the more famous aikidoka listed on the List of aikidoka and American aikidoka (why are there two?) pages and none of them came up with anything, either. I also tried the heads of the major U.S. aikido organizations, with similar results. I know that this doesn't necessarily affect the page I'm working on, but the current most notable aikido instructors (in the real world) have even weaker support for Wikipedia notability on their pages. I'd hate to think that now we're going to go through and eliminate all American aikido from Wikipedia. Anyways, thanks again for the help. Maybe Wikipedia is just not the right place for the history of aikido. Joe Shuri (talk) 02:26, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You don't want to open the "other articles exist" can of worms. I don't know why this article was picked. I can tell you I sometimes nominate articles as I come across them, not because I'm doing a systematic search. You probably don't have to fear an all-out assault on aikido articles, but if you see some are weak it would help if you improved them. I used that source on magazines because I've had good luck finding articles on traditional Japanese (and other) martial artists when they didn't seem to meet WP:MANOTE. I'll try to remember it's not good for aikido. Papaursa (talk) 03:00, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've declined the speedy at EFC Africa because the version does have sources that were not on the version deleted in 2011 and 2013. I do think that notability is still very much in question, but there's enough on the page and at places such as this paper that keep it from being neatly speedied. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:49, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I knew this was coming...... under WP:Bodybuilding guidelines, winners of national/international titles are notable; i.e. the North American championship. His website has been down for a while and I know he has cancer right now and has not responded to my note to him about this. Citations for his national placing and North American title win are out there, I haven't had time to look being somewhat wiki-preoccupied elsewhere; there may be a bio article on him published by a Rod Labbe, that has the personal details; mostly I'm concerned that the difficulty in citing bodybuilding bios is that citations are often in bb'ing forums and blogs and in magazines that the rest of the world does not recognize as "notable". Contest results are not published in major papers etc, and where they are listed on blog sites those are not acceptable to Wikipedia. I know OTHERSTUFFEXISTS but there's hosts of women bodybuilders who have bios because they go out and get press in Wikipedia, but many of the men's article are undersourced and underwritten. This isn't the only one in danger of alleged non-notability; I'm removing the PROD tag on the basis of WikiProject Bodybuilding notability parameters, however.Skookum1 (talk) 07:41, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm actually a bit stunned that the very well-known Dennis Newman is a red-link...maybe he was PRODded? I don't have time to devote to WPBB right now; and Kevin is a minor albeit still notable figure......major bios like Newmans and others are needed; but WPBB is understaffed/underpopulated.....Skookum1 (talk) 07:44, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a list of notability criteria for bodybuilders. When I looked at the source you added it shows he won a division with 3 entrants and that apparently at least one division had only 1 competitor--not much of a major championship in my eyes. While I'm tempted to put this up for AfD, frankly I don't really care about bodybuilders. I came across the article because it claimed he was an MMA fighter and I removed those unsourced claims. Papaursa (talk) 22:29, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Every UFC event has its own page so why shouldn't this? Lukejordan02 (talk) 02:21, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

UFC 27 already exists, why create UFC 027? In addition, UFC 27 was already found to be not notable at the AFD discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UFC 27. Papaursa (talk) 02:24, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter it can be deleted I found a better way to do what I planned. Lukejordan02 (talk) 02:31, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious, what is it you're trying to do? Papaursa (talk) 03:01, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to make sure that there was a page on wiki with the results of the event rather than a redirect to a list of events. Lukejordan02 (talk) 03:04, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like that falls under WP:ISNOT. I don't think WP was meant to store routine sports results when there are plenty of MMA sites, like Sherdog, that already do that. That is why the original UFC 27 article was deleted. Papaursa (talk) 03:37, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't been restoring anything i was going to but the results back on for UFC 27 but that's it. Lukejordan02 (talk) 03:49, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually you are recreating articles that have already been deleted via AfD discussion. These articles were deleted because the WP community decided that these individual events were not notable. Papaursa (talk) 03:51, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please show me a link, I recreated ONE article UFC 27 (UFC 027) which i did not no had been previously deleted until after i had created it that is it. Lukejordan02 (talk) 03:53, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UFC Ultimate Fight Night shows that article was previously deleted, but you recreated it. I don't know how many articles you've added or modified, but I'm trying to save you from doing a bunch of work that will ultimately just get deleted again. Virtually all of the UFC events once had pages and a search of the archives at WT:MMA will show you the discussions that have gone on regarding how to handle MMA events. That is why so many of them were reduced to lists of events. Papaursa (talk) 04:04, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info, I didn't no there was a way of knowing if a page had been previously deleted but now I do so thanks. Just trying to help Kind regards Lukejordan02 (talk) 04:15, 20 May 2014 (UTC).[reply]

I'm just trying to save everyone some needless work, which allows you to focus on creating/improving other articles. Without going through your editing history, which I'd rather not, I don't know which articles you may have recreated but you probably do. It would be nice if you'd change them to redirect to List of UFC events. I think that's the easiest way to handle this. Papaursa (talk) 04:37, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I only changed the one and that has been fixed now. Lukejordan02 (talk) 05:03, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I should have caught this but I didn't. After I sent Paulie Ayala (featherweight boxer) to AfD debate more information and references were added. Normally that would be a great thing but in this instance it was from a different Paulie Ayala who confusingly also is a boxer. I don't know why I left it at that point because I did know about it - just did not remember. I think what I should do is revert Paulie Ayala (featherweight boxer) to my June 8th version and resubmit to AfD debate. I am pretty sure the revert is a must (but my paranoia suggests that the wrong one could be changed) but what is your opinion on the AfD submission? Peter Rehse (talk) 15:39, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that is confusing! The sources even seem to have mixed up the two fighters. I think that the articles need to be cleaned up and a careful detailed explanation made at the AfD. I think the non world champion could again be put for deletion. I feel bad that I missed that, but when even the sources get it wrong I think it's understandable. Papaursa (talk) 19:28, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Any comment about what do here. Admitted autobiographical but it and Malta Boxing Commission International and Malta Boxing Commission all seem to be a non-notable walled garden.Peter Rehse (talk) 20:29, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here's my opinion on these 3 articles, based on a very quick look at the sources. Only the Malta Boxing Commission looks like it has reasonable grounds to claim it's notable (it's sourcing is weak, but possibly sufficient). Di Caro's article appears to fail WP:GNG, although a redirect to the Malta Boxing Commission is reasonable. The International article looks like an attempt to create another set of minor boxing titles (just what the sport needs) but it also looks short on significant independent coverage. If I were king, I'd probably redirect/merge all 3 articles into the Malta Boxing Commission article. Papaursa (talk) 20:49, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thought you might be interested in the discussion about whether or not interim boxing titles are notable at [26]. There's also one at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing#Interim title notability. Jakejr (talk) 04:58, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well we have a new variation of Richie Vas and Richie Vaculik but in this case I think it is a different editor and it is close enough to notability via WP:MMANOT that I personally think a speedy deletion is not required. The problem is the two previous articles have been locked into redirects which seems silly. Not sure how to fix this.Peter Rehse (talk) 10:03, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see you have already handled this. Although it's WP:CRYSTALBALL, I do believe he will soon meet NMMA so I think the article should be left alone for the time being. Did you notice that Paige Van Zant's UFC debut has been pushed back to late November because of an unspecified injury? It may be longer than expected until she meets NMMA. Papaursa (talk) 03:40, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I got that sorted out eventually. I also noticed the Paige issue - classic example of promise not fulfilled.Peter Rehse (talk) 07:07, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I started a debate on her talk page. Dwanyewest (talk) 04:27, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it will be much of a debate. I'm not expecting anyone to argue for the page's deletion. Papaursa (talk) 00:32, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

EFC Africa has the largest TV sports audience it has a network deal with Fight Network. Surely some of the sources below should make the organisation notable? I ask this so I don't get nominated again and the article is deleted. So I wanna make sure that at least some of the articles are considered good you can see for yourself some are from national South Africa newspapers saying that EFC has large TV ratings and is growing. Dwanyewest (talk) 08:33, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.themmareview.co.uk/2012/08/efc-africa-signs-multi-year-broadcast-deal-with-fight-network/ http://pressportal.co.za/sport/story/6628/betting-on-efc-africa-title-fights-at-betxchange-set-to-knock-out-viewership-record-in-south-africa.html http://www.setanta.com/ie/fadipe-looks-to-conquer-africa/ http://www.sportindustry.co.za/news/view/6526/efc-africa-president-reflects-on-the-sport%E2%80%99s-remarkable-growth http://www.themarketingsite.com/live/article/efc-africa-voted-one-of-the-top-6-sport-brands-in-sa/26681/ http://fightnetwork.com/news/33346:fight-network-signs-tv-partnership-with-efc-africa/ http://www.mixedmartialarts.com/news/436259/EFC-Africa-coming-to-65000000-US-homes http://pressportal.co.za/sport/story/6628/betting-on-efc-africa-title-fights-at-betxchange-set-to-knock-out-viewership-record-in-south-africa.html http://adcombat.com/extreme-fighting-championship-explodes-on-african-tv http://news.efinancialcareers.com/uk-en/6551/the-efc-interview-david-woods-co-chief-executive-officer-rasmala-investment-bank/ http://mmajunkie.com/2012/07/efc-africa-signs-programming-deal-with-fight-now-tv-efc-africa-15-airs-today http://www.sportindustry.co.za/news/view/4159/efc-africa-pulls-big-tv-ratings http://www.newsmonitor.co.za/newsmonitor/view/newsmonitor/en/page28457?oid=3220724&sn=Article%20Detail&pid=558&highlight= http://www.mediaupdate.co.za/?IDStory=45630 http://combatpress.com/2014/08/efc-africa-champion-garreth-mclellan-laying-the-foundation-for-success/

Most of these sources existed at the last deletion discussion in March. I can't access several of the links and at least one has nothing to do with MMA. Other mentions are passing in articles about fighters or routine coverage. The claim of being available in 65 million U.S. homes needs some independent source. When I clicked on the U.S. schedule connected with that article I got a 404 error. I don't see anything that has changed to make this promotion notable. Papaursa (talk) 18:38, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well played sir, well played. If our exchanges make this place the least bit better than they are likely worth every byte. :) Buddy23Lee (talk) 23:00, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, it seems like you were getting a mite testy there. Frankly, I'm a bit surprised there weren't more/better sources and I was very surprised to not see more people participating in the debate. It was certainly posted for a long time--nearly a month. Papaursa (talk) 03:28, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Testy? TESTY?! Maybe it was just some permutation of Poe's Law in effect? :) I tend to see these things as part of an adversarial process (much like the US judicial system) and I just work as zealously as possible to support, what I guess would be what I see as the "spirit" of the wiki. That said, you do make a good point. I'd hope my...zeal, didn't dissuade any consensus building, let alone participating. nonetheless, cheers my friend, until next time. Oh, and to put it plainly and in all candor, I harbor only respect and admiration for you...even though we do always seem to be on opposing sides. :P Buddy23Lee (talk) 08:55, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We've only had 2 disagreements, but they both started a lively dialogue. I would hope it didn't chase off other editors and, this being the internet where discussions often generate more heat than light, I doubt our civil disagreement did. Papaursa (talk) 22:24, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion Please speak up and judge fairly, they grew a lot. I'm not going to edit without you guys. 1 or 2. Illovecoffee (talk) 21:54, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Could you take a quick look at my talk page on the comments regarding WSOF. If there is some substance to them I would bring the men to debate for Top Tier again. JMichael22's response was my question on his talk page which was to the repost of Justin Gaethje.Peter Rehse (talk) 20:35, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Papaursa. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryan Martin (boxer), you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryan Martin (boxer) (2nd nomination). Cunard (talk) 03:00, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Papaursa. Per your participation and comment I have included more sources that show significant coverage directly related to the subject. Also-user Cunard added another magazine source. C.dunkin (talk) 02:40, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I have been putting forth a lot of Olympians as well as US national champions. That according to wp:manote makes them notable. I also include references. CrazyAces489 (talk) 03:10, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's true Olympians are considered automatically notable. I saw that you have been creating articles on those individuals. As for national champions, it depends on what division they won. Senior citizen or junior divisions would not show notability. Papaursa (talk) 05:03, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Discounting those without a username, there were 3 "delete" and 1 "keep". The reason I came to a "no consensus" decision was that there weren't any substantial arguments to counter CrazyAces489's point that some of the external sources provided more than passing coverage. (Contrast this to my "delete" decision on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Odell Terry because those arguing for deletion did convince me that all the sources were just passing mentions.)

I do apologise for the premature closure after its relisting. The reason it happened was that Coffee performed an incomplete relist, which meant the bot updating the WP:AfD backlog incorrectly flagged it as overdue when in fact it was relisted less than 7 days ago. By the time I realised this had happened I have already closed multiple three AfDs without realising they were incompletely relisted less than 7 days ago... so I just left them there and waited for people to start shouting at me if they want to.

Thanks for getting back to me on the decision and picking up on my mistake of closing too early. Deryck C. 09:07, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Does that mean you're going to reopen it? Also, both the nominator and I mentioned that the references consisted only of passing mentions and results and did not meet WP:GNG. I was thinking of opening a deletion review, but perhaps you can at least let it run for the full time of the relisting and see if anyone else chimes in with an opinion. That seems both reasonable and less bureaucratic. Papaursa (talk) 22:47, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Having discussed with Coffee on the matter of incorrect relisting + premature closure, I feel that reopening the AfD as-is wouldn't be the best option. To respond to your point above, my understanding of GNG is that if sources are given, we need to exhaustively argue that the cited sources do not qualify in order to effect a deletion. This is because if any two (i.e. multiple) sources meet the GNG, then the subject is notable. In that case, the standing of other sources and the career achievement of the martial artist in question are both irrelevant to notability.

Since there is disagreement over whether the sources are "passing mention" or "in-depth coverage", I felt compelled to read the sources for myself and some of them would be considered "in-depth" from my point of view. So in the end I weighed up the following:

1. The number of participants was small (4 with usernames, 2 anons)
2. 3-1 majority towards delete
3. But the state of the article supported the keep side's argument more than the delete side's argument

And that led me towards the NC decision.

I'm not saying my interpretation of policy is necessarily correct - there are as many admins on the English Wikipedia as there are interpretations of policy. Perhaps we do disagree over the precise interpretation and application of GNG. If that's the case, I think DRV is a more appropriate place to test the premise of policy than relisting because it is more likely to garner interest from those with a strong understanding of current Wikipedia policy. Deryck C. 00:03, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Deryck, We can save ourselves some time if you would please tell me which references you believe show significant coverage of him in independent sources. I see results, passing mentions, and mentions from organizations and dojos he founded--but not one of the 15 sources I looked at showed me what I believe can be called significant independent coverage (and GNG requires multiple such sources). Papaursa (talk) 04:32, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  I consider the following "detailed coverage":

  • [27] - Long article on Judo Info in which Reed demonstrated moves. For a martial artist I'd accept that as coverage of the person as well as the move.
  • [28] - Half-page biography of Reed in the award announcement
  • [29] I can't say definitively on this one, but the abstract leads me to believe that there's more than a sentence about Reed in the book.

  Deryck C. 20:22, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at the three sources you mentioned. In the first one his name is mentioned once, the second one is from an organization he helped found, and in the third one he's not mentioned in the synopsis at all--just as being an instructor of the author. That book is about a single school in Seattle and I couldn't find it on Amazon to try to look in more detail. As I said, I don't see that any of those represent significant independent coverage, so I think I will take this to deletion review. Papaursa (talk) 02:08, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For source (1) you may wish to use both his given name and surname as search keywords. (2) and (3) we agree to disagree. See you at DRV. Deryck C. 17:21, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The question is who is the sock and who is the master? Not worried just seriously pissed with the behaviour.Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PRehsePeter Rehse (talk) 12:35, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Papaursa. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of EFC Worldwide, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There's quite a bit more in this version than there was in the previous, enough to make it different enough to need to go back to AfD. Sorry. . Thank you. GedUK  12:25, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Papaursa,

I would like to improve the article. I have gone through wikipedia Guidelines for notability and I agree to you the references do meet the criteria. Please advise on how to improve the article. I have linked the article to various other pages. Your support is highly appreciated Eve099 (talk) 11:26, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You can add information from reliable sources, (see WP:RS). I would minimize, but not necessarily eliminate, sources that are not independent--especially those that are generated by Mehta himself. I would list any honors or awards he's received, but make sure the source for them isn't Mehta. Claims like mastering 14 fitness disciplines appear highly promotional unless they're sourced by something besides Mehta's claims in an interview--and I doubt there are independent sources for that claim. Another problem with that claim is that it's not clear what "mastering" means for martial arts, cross-training, pilates, etc. Papaursa (talk) 13:47, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've been observing the activities of CrazyAces and the NegroLeagueHistorian account, as other users believe it is the same individual, and wonder if it is ok to have two accounts at the same time in use? I am only interested in protecting notable music articles CA attacked as a result of a battleground mentality, so that is why I'm reaching out. So far, NegroLeagueHistorian has been involved in some controversial disputes at AFDs he either started it came to defend their stub articles, and CA returns out of "retirement" to defend their latest article. I'm afraid this will eventually escalate like before, so I was hoping CA could be told to be contained to one account, whether it be the new or old one. But I agree with your past comment, CA only did this to avoid punishment, which is wrong. Please get back to me at your convenience, thanks.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 19:05, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Multiple accounts says "It is recommended that multiple accounts be identified as such on their user pages". If this has not been done, and given CA's past history, if both users are currently active I would suggest taking it to WP:SPI. User Mkdw has been involved in related discussions and is an administrator, so you might ask his opinion. Papaursa (talk) 00:26, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate the response. In an ironic twist since my first comment, CA "retired" again in a similar fashion on their new account User:NegroLeagueHistorian. He was using both accounts, though not on the same articles, but the policy does strictly say to avoid the same editing habits if they truly wanted a clean start. However, he continued making unnotable stub articles and nominating clear-cut notable pages for deletion, which caused controversy. To me, this "retirement" is another attempt to evade scrutiny, which is also not allowed, per policy. I may take this to Mkdw as you recommended, but as of right now we don't know who the new CA account is. If he becomes a problem for you, since he more than likely will remain in the same topic range, leave me a message and I'll take the steps necessary.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 04:17, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually he has been active on the CA account again. Kinda confusing.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 04:26, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully, though I doubt it, this is the last time I have to bug you with this issue. CA "retired" to avoid scrutiny again, but referred to a third unnamed account that he said he would use for another "clean start" as he failed to do with User:NegroLeagueHistorian. I know the two of you will more than likely cross paths again, so if you find an editing pattern similar to CA, report it to Bishonen and he will handle it promptly. Thanks for fixing up all the mess CA has caused with his articles.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 15:16, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Based on your participation at the previous deletion discussion, you may be interested in the ongoing deletion discussion for Athletics at the 2015 Southeast Asian Games – Men's 100 metres which can be found at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Athletics at the 2015 Southeast Asian Games – Men's 100 metres (2nd nomination). ~ Rob^Talk 09:00, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Jose Landi. I do not think that Jose Landi fits any of the speedy deletion criteria  because This article was indeed deleted via AfD, but was restored after a discussion at WP:DRV so WP:CSD#G4 does not apply. I request that you consider not re-tagging Jose Landi for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. DES ^(talk) 22:31, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for finally bringing the CrazyAces situation to the sockpuppet investigation...and noticing the unfortunate comments made afterwards. It will not be pretty when the block is lifted so be on the lookout (as I know you already are). If anything, those rants CA gave offer more reasons to eventually indef block him when the decision inevitably comes to someone's concern. Unfortunately, he is building a tremendously uncomfortable atmosphere for editors who just wanted to help him.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 05:01, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Papaursa, I am writing because of the speedy deletion nomination of André Tete, a former heavyweight European and World champion Muay Thai fighter. I have contested the deletion of the article, since I believe André Tete to be a well known fighter and a notable figure in Sports. He was featured in the book "Greatest Muay Thai Fighters to Ever Compete: Top 100" published by booktango ISBN 978-1-4689-3725-1 where he is listed as the 30th greatest Muay thai fighter in the history of the sport. He has been mentioned quite a lot lately in National newspapers, since his nephew is now the starting right back for the association football club AFC Ajax and for the Dutch national team. This is what lead me to write about him and to reinstate the previously written article, while enhancing the quality. I have added references to various news sources, both MMA specific and not, as well as including the book which features significant coverage of the fighter. Please let me know what else you would consider necessary for this article to remain. Thank you again for your reconsideration and I look forward to your response. Regards, (Subzzee (talk) 10:55, 10 December 2015 (UTC))[reply]

The fact that is nephew is a successful soccer player does not add to his notability at all. Which Muay Thai world title did he win? If you can show he meets WP:KICK then I would support an article on him. Simply being listed in someone's self-published book is not significant or reliable coverage. Papaursa (talk) 15:04, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

		Wikiclaus greetings
		Michael Q. Schmidt talkback is wishing you the happiest of Wikiclaus' Wikipedian good cheer. This message is intended to celebrate the holiday season, promote WikiCheer, and to hopefully make your day just a little bit better, for Wikiclaus encourages us all to spread smiles, fellowship, and seasonal good cheer by wishing others a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings and the happiest of holiday spirits from Wikiclaus !

Following discussion with you have been engaged in, I have put forward an amendment to the Notability Criteria for boxers which is up for discussion Here. Your in put would be greatly welcomed. --Donniediamond (talk) 09:34, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As Neha Rathore has been an active player since 2004-2009, So there is no source to track all newspaper information as the national and local dailies dis not had online or e-papers available during this time frame. So what should be done to bring up the required information on Wikipedia to sow authenticity of the information so given fo r all acheivemnets?

Kindly help.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smackyneha (talk • contribs) 13:13, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious - where are you posting from. Don't answer if you don't want to - continent alone will satisfy my need to pry.Peter Rehse (talk) 18:22, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

North America. Why? Papaursa (talk) 18:25, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No reason other than morbid curiosity - I had thought Australia for some reason.Peter Rehse (talk) 18:29, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I just updated my user page for the morbidly curious. Papaursa (talk) 16:09, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Laughs. I had a moment. By the way everyone was thinking CrazyAces but didn't want to say it.Peter Rehse (talk) 16:15, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I assumed that. He is the Lord Voldemort of WP--"He who must not be named." I see he's proposed his own set of notability criteria for judo at WT:NSPORT. Papaursa (talk) 23:10, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Watching that - but no need to feed the beast. Lord V of WP - I like that.Peter Rehse (talk) 23:35, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing that an IP came out of nowhere to support the new proposal, I felt compelled to comment on it. Papaursa (talk) 17:36, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I know we do not talk much (maybe twice?), but do not let the recent headaches force you out of here. I realize you have dealt with users who simply cannot understand why something such as an Afd does not go there way, and feel inclined to target you with unsupported claims. It must be beyond annoying and tiresome. However, you are a solid editor who has been a tremendous source of reason and knowledge of policy. It would be a sad loss to the martial arts project if you retired from editing.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 06:17, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the kind words, but WP has become such a source of stress that I think it's not worth dealing with. I may comment on AfD discussions, but I see my participation decreasing significantly (perhaps even ceasing). Papaursa (talk) 04:14, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I recreated Kūdō today, not knowing the original Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daido Juku Kudo had been put up for deletion 3 years ago. Can you help me improve it? Thanks!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 09:02, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The problem I see is that there's still a lack of independent coverage. It would greatly improve the article if you could find some sources covering Kūdō that are not related to the art itself. For example, articles in magazines that are general martial arts publications and not involved with Kūdō at all. Papaursa (talk) 11:11, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this article was deleted in 2014 after an AfD in which you participated. After a request on my talk page in which new sources were mentioned, I have restored the article. However, martial arts is not my thing at all, so you may want to have a look at the article and the sources (that hopefully will be added to the article soon) and, if you find them wanting, take it to AfD again. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 13:11, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Now has its own Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Boxing.Peter Rehse (talk) 09:13, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up. Papaursa (talk) 19:05, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have declined your speedy deletion nomination of Pascal Soetens, because the current article has much better sourcing than the one deleted as a result of the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pascal Soetens. You are, of course, free to take it to a second deletion discussion if you think it is still not suitable as an article. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:15, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Would the following resource qualify as reliable as it is a project by an independent government agency? PD2D2 (talk) 21:04, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Ethnic Life Stories Project Sanctioned by Springfield-Greene County Library District These are not self-submitted articles or biographies.

Project Background: https://thelibrary.org/lochist/els/menu.cfm Project Biographies: https://thelibrary.org/lochist/els/toc.cfm Subject Biography: https://thelibrary.org/lochist/els/trithara.pdf

I don't think it qualifies as independent. "These storytellers, your neighbors, have recorded their life stories" indicates these are not produced by sources independent from the individuals. There's no independent fact checking so I'd say WP:RS is not met. Papaursa (talk) 21:16, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I removed your notability template on Paul Upton. As the article meets WP:NBOX I don't think it is accurate to say it does not appear to meet notability guidelines. Obviously, if you think the subject is not notable, then feel free to go the AfD route. However, with the article meeting the sport specific guideline I don't see why the template would be appropriate. RonSigPi (talk) 04:30, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking he had to be at least a continental champion, but you're right--he does appear to meet WP:NBOX. Papaursa (talk) 22:43, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Varmakkalai" is an dying ancient martial art which has been taught and its medical system were properly used to treat people by Aasan R. Rajendran. The organizations "The Hindu" and "The New Indian Express" are top news papers of India(2 articles were quoted in our wiki page), following to it "Dinamalar" is one of the top South India news media (Please consider translating those pages and SBS Australia's Interview from our native language Tamil to English). Request not to consider the article for deletion as Aasan R. Rajendran has dedicated his life to save this art which is yet to get the limelight in media due to its unpolished and raw look. This Wikipedia page would be a small resource for people to know about the truth about his service to this martial art/medical system. Please consider. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indaravind (talk • contribs) 18:48, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		The MMA Barnstar
		I, Phospheros (talk), hereby award Papaursa the The MMA Barnstar for his/her valued contributions to WikiProject MMA. Awarded 05:54, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, Phospheros. Papaursa (talk) 00:26, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Syeda Falak is a notable Karate ka, She has all documents to proof her participation in various national and International tournaments. Please restore Syeda Falak Wikipedia article as soon as possible. King John556 (talk) 04:56, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In case you were wondering, John here is referring to this AFD you participated in. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 04:59, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I remember that article and discussion. The factual errors were overwhelming and there was nothing to show that any notability criteria was met--even if the claims were true. I would suggest that the author of a new article on her needs to show either Olympic participation or success, not merely participation, at a WKF world championship. Thousands of people participate, what is needed is documented proof of success at major, not minor, events. Of course, meeting WP:GNG would also be sufficient--but that would require more than passing mentions or mere reporting of results. My final comment is that junior martial artist accomplishments are never considered notable so she needs to have had success as an adult. Papaursa (talk) 20:42, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Papaursa. I've declined the G4 tag you placed on Tyrell Fortune, as the current version of the article is substantially different to the version deleted at AFD. This isn't a criticism of your tag - you had no way of knowing what the deleted article looked like - but if you feel the article should be deleted you'll need to pursue a different method of deletion, either WP:PROD or a new WP:AFD discussion, as G4 does not apply here. Yunshui ^雲_水 13:48, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Papaursa. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Marina Shafir, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There's more sources now than before, not substantially the same as last time. Needs to go back to AfD if necessary. Thank you. GedUK  13:57, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pure discrimination. I have just checked, in MMA you only need to fight 3 fights in the UFC. And Cătinaș has 9 in K-1. Then they deleted Superkombat by abuse of office, organisation with 15 years of promotion and in 2011 it was named as "No 1 promotion in the world, over Ultimate Glory and It's Showtime". .karellian-24 (talk) 23:09, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No argument about your fight counts, but that's comparing apples and oranges. For example, in a K-1 tournament a fighter could get 3 fights in a night, it would take a UFC fighter a year to get that many. Plus the UFC is the highest level, much like K-1 was years ago. Fighters didn't start in K-1 or the UFC. The number of kickboxing fights have never been considered a significant indicator of notability. Superkombat was deleted multiple times by consensus, not by "abuse of office". You obviously don't like the kickboxer notability criteria, so try to change them instead of just complaining about them and saying they're wrong. Papaursa (talk) 18:45, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi you have deleted an article that I had submitted. I had been working on it for months.

Can you send me the wiki markup for the article so that I may continue to edit the article privately until I resubmit sometime in the future when you finally recognise Mokaev as worthy of an article here.

Rassmallai (talk) 01:58, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did not delete that article and I don't have the access to recover the deleted article. I would suggest you ask the administrator that deleted the article, Spartaz. Papaursa (talk) 16:22, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:27, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Christmas tree decorations 5.jpg	Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021!
	Hello Papaursa, Wishing you a joyous holiday season and a happy and peaceful New Year. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia(talk) 23:59, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cassiopeia, thank you. I hope your holidays and 2021 bring you peace and happiness. Papaursa (talk) 17:05, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You had participated in the 30-day RfC of Sherdog.com's reliability at RSN here Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_318#Sherdog.com and in the end it was closed to be used only for some basic fight information in the absence of reliable sources such as ESPN, on a case by case basis and with that fact that additional considerations apply on top of it (option 2 or 3).

But some editors (NEDOCHAN, Cassiopeia, Squared.Circle.Boxing, and a couple more) who voted for the reliability of Sherdog.com in the RfC, still enforce the usage of Sherdog.com as the most trusted source on MMA-related pages and go edit-wars for it. They are like a small organized gang of editors that have taken anyting MMA-related hostage on the Wikipedia and act like owners of the whole site. It would be nice if you could help with the enforcement of the result and consensus that were reached there since you helped reaching the consensus in the RfC. Thanks in advance.78.190.164.254 (talk) 16:01, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They are especially active on pages Conor_McGregor, Tony Ferguson and Dan Henderson, trying to enforce the usage of Sherdog.com as the source over reliable sources such as ESPN, Fox, UFC.78.190.164.254 (talk) 16:07, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Papaursa. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Solo Darling, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Substantially more references than when it was first deleted, and there appears to be evidence of professional wrestling, which were the two reasons it was deleted the first time. Fails the CSD criteria, so needs to go back to AfD if required. . Thank you. GedUK  14:33, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Papausa,You On the Nabi Mammadov's deletion discussion page, you wrote that the athlete has never competed in the world championship.But you are false. Athlete competed in World championships 2 times. First Sambo world championships 2013 , second WMMAA - 2018 European MMA Championships.He has also competed in the European Championships 2 times and will compete in the 2021 Sambo Championship on May 26.Please do some research before typing in argument and delete the wrong information you have written on the delete discussion page. if you want evidence, come here: Evidence about the athlete's competition in the sambo world championship: http://www.eurosambo.com/media/results/en/94/cm_100.pdf Evidence about the athlete's competition in the MMA world championships: http://setopen.sportdata.org/mmaranking/ranking_main_competitor.php?ranking_country=AZE&ranking_competitor=AZE15&ranking_competitor_name=MAMMADOV%20NABI

— Mendyalvares (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 14:30, 21 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

According to the FIAS, this year's world sambo championships will be held in Tashkent in November. The event you're talking about is a minor event. The WMMAA is an amateur event that carries no significance for MMA notability and losing a first round match at the world sambo championships also fails to show notability. Amateur competitions mean nothing in MMA or kickboxing. Again, just showing up and never winning a significant match does not show notability, especially with a lack of significant independent coverage. Frankly, I have to assume you're another sockpuppet since this is your only WP edit. Papaursa (talk) 23:35, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Papaursa, May you kindly comment on Draft:Mohammad Reza Goodary for help move on main space? There are credible sources based on WP:News sources/ASIA and WP:News sources/AFRICA. The athlete is approved by me and I monitor his activities in Thailand as an Iranian-American journalist. Regards. MMA Kid (talk) 09:12, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I like the fact that he's been competing in different martial arts. I have a few comments about the article. I looked at some, by no means all, of the sources and I found lots of routine sports reporting--results, fight promotional material, and interviews. These can be useful but they do not qualify as significant independent coverage in reliable sources that help show he meets WP:GNG. In addition, his tournament successes need to expanded upon. It's important to know the divisions and levels he competed at. For example, his Siam Cup medals were won in blue belt divisions. These do not show WP notability. WP:MANOTE shows notability criteria for martial arts--except for MMA, boxing, and kickboxing which have their own notability criteria. You'll see that notability requires success at the adult black-belt level. Junior and other age limited divisions do not count since they are not considered the highest level. It doesn't mean they can't appear in the article, just don't expect other editors to give them much weight towards notability. To show notability you should focus on major black-belt international events with a large number of competitors in the divisions he won medals in. Hope this helps. Papaursa (talk) 01:01, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Papaursa, Thanks for contributing in the discussion of article Atul Raghav. I think you missed one thing: TaekwondoData have the data of only senior athletes(above 18 years) or who have black belt. You won't find any data of any athlete who is minor even If he/she has participated in world junior championship. check the facts. the subject was just 16 years in 2020.(at present 17 years) You cannot compare him with an athlete who is 19 years. I believe that you might be knowing that Martials arts have their repective categories of weight, age and belt. For example: just check the participants of 8th Fujaiarah 2020 on worldtkd.simplycompete.com [[30]]

• On the first page there's player profile name Aaesha MOHAMED WT License #: UAE-3651 [[31]]
• Now check the subject profile Atul Raghav on page 46 Atul RAGHAV WT License #: IND-7942 [[32]]

Did you noticed the common thing? Athlete Not Ranked because they are minor in age.

• Now check the profile of Abdalaziz ABDALLA WT License #: SUD-1539 [[33]]

Sorry to made you do research but now, Did you verifed the facts on Taekwondo Data? that even if someone has achieved a medal in junior category. His data won't be shown unless he turns 18 but his ranking will be keep marked and this doesn't mean that someone is not notable. As I said, it's hard to show a 17 year someone notable but the subject has reliable sources, have achieved medals and thus needs to be marked on wikipedia as well. Junior athletes has a different platform Youth Olympics. they cannot be judged on the basis of senior athletes of olympics. Please don't be harsh on junior athletes. They need to be supported not biten. Thanks Divineplus (talk) 17:22, 11 October 2021 (UTC).[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mixed martial arts § The Sherdog requirement. Cassiopeia talk 01:21, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! Hi Papaursa, Have an enjoyable holiday season! Cassiopeia talk 09:31, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cassiopeia Thank you and the same to you. Papaursa (talk) 23:39, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

I have recreated the page World Tang Soo Do Association with many primary sources. It is however new, and seeing your passion in martial arts Wikipedia pages and being a part of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World Tang Soo Do Association by a now banned administrator, I thought you would like to look over the page and if possible, help raise the quality, as it is a new article. It has been 12 years since this deletion and I am rewriting it. Thanks for reading!

AWESOMEDUDE0614 (talk) 14:38, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AWESOMEDUDE0614 I took a look at the article's page and immediately noticed a problem with the references. They were either from the organization itself or from Black Belt magazine. That's not good enough to be even close to meeting WP:GNG, which requires significant independent coverage from multiple sources. The organization's own publications are clearly not independent and all the Black Belt magazine references count as one (WP:N says "Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability"). I would recommend finding some more independent sources that discuss the organization in detail. Papaursa (talk) 01:41, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I spent an hour savaging the internet for more notable sources. I got a couple, including one from Drexel University, but oh my is the search engine clogged up with all of the websites of the individual studios that are in the association. AWESOMEDUDE0614 (talk) 14:19, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not surprised. Your best bet may be other martial arts magazines besides Black Belt. Since the organization is headquartered in North Carolina, language shouldn't be a barrier. The inability to find significant independent coverage of a modern American organization isn't a good sign for claiming it's WP notable. Papaursa (talk) 04:07, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just because there are numerous sites for studios in the organization clogging up the search engine by means of SEO, it does not mean that it isn't WP notable. Finding a news article mentioning the association in an '80s-'90s martial arts magazine is exceptionally difficult because nobody exactly bothers about SEO for that. However I will try Google Books and the Internet Archive and see what I get. AWESOMEDUDE0614 (talk) 12:13, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't have to be an old martial arts magazine. Are you saying there's no current coverage of the organization? It's only not WP notable if significant, independent coverage can't be found. I'm hoping you find sources, but finding good coverage of martial arts topics is often problematic. Papaursa (talk) 02:09, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lethweimaster (talk) 07:49, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]