Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mixed martial arts/Archive 13

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

User script to detect unreliable sources

Main page: User:Headbomb/unreliable

I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)

and turns it into something like

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Vik Grujic fought in the UFC 4 times

Why was Vik Grujic deleted for no reason despite having 4 times in the UFC such as Brendan O'Reilly, Chris Clements, Chris Indich, Nordine Taleb and had sources. Dwanyewest (talk) 18:43, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

He met the old notability criteria at WP:NMMA, but appearance criteria were notability were removed for most, if not all, sports relatively recently. This meant he either had to be ranked in the top 10, and he wasn't close, or needed to meet WP:GNG and there was no evidence of that, either. The new sports policy has led to many AfD discussions for both MMA fighters and former Olympians. Papaursa (talk) 23:20, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Proposal: Promote ONE To Tier One

Hello, I am writing in regards to promoting ONE Championship to Tier One. After seeing that Bellator was re-elevated to the top tier, I feel that ONE is clearly more notable than them and, thus, deserving of the distinction as well.

Rankings

I do understand and respect the desire for strong guidelines, but as has been discussed in previous debates (that I have read) they are terribly flawed. Sherdog rankings, for one, are nowhere near what they used to be. The rankings were highly trusted when the site featured Josh Sherwood, Jordan Breen, Josh Gross, and many other top minds in the sport. However, the site has been sold long since then and none of them are employed there. The Sherdog rankings hold absolutely no significance in today's sport. Not to mention, almost all human-based rankings from individual sites are inherently flawed due to the amount of focus on the UFC, domestically. The individual bandwidth of writers does not allow them to have a full scope of a global sport.

Adding in FightMatrix is a positive step, but it's not a universally praised metric. However, it removing human bias is, at the very least, understandable why it was added in conjunction.

I think using rankings is fine in theory, but when they are so flawed as they are today then they do little to help accuracy of what is notable and what is not.

Perception & Contracts

Invicta is a Tier One promotion. However, perception from even a casual fan is that they are a minor league. They are there to elevate women athletes to bigger organizations. One of those organizations is ONE (Alyse Anderson is under contract). That is why contracts matter. It does not make much sense how a feeder league is considered at a higher tier than an organization that is above them as a destination.

UFC, Bellator, and ONE are three of the very few organizations who have legitimate contracts for its athletes. Most other athletes, including those at Invicta, have the ability to compete elsewhere. This issue was brought up by a Brand Marketing Manager looking to sponsor fighters on FightMatrix's website as they made a suggestion that is worth noting for this case as well:

"What I typically end up doing, and have so for years, is copying the top 200 from those list, pasting them in a Google Sheet, then manually removing the "PFL, ONE, and RIZN" fighters. Those, along w/ UFC and Bellator makeup "the big five" -- they have actual contracts, and their opportunities are limited.

These contracted athletes basically lack the sovereignty and agency of a regional fighter. Even Invicta, ACA, Eagle, Shooto, Pancrase, KSW and the like...largely allow fighters some "agency" to move around from promotion to promotion and do their own thing."

This is not an insignificant point. If fact, it may be one of the stronger aspects of a notable promotion. A smaller, Second Tier, promotion would not be able to have exclusive contracts with athletes for their roster while Tier One promotions have that ability. ONE checks that box.

Broadcast Deal

The UFC and PFL have a broadcast deal, domestically, with ESPN. This builds off the perception portion of this proposal. ONE has just announced a deal with Amazon Prime Video, one of the giant streaming services.

Other promotions, such as RIZIN, have no such deals in place in the U.S. Invicta is on UFC's platform, which again speaks to them being a second-tier promotion. Although my case is not to drop Invicta, but the dichotomy between Invicta and ONE shows a stunning lack of understanding of the sport's landscape. The depth of knowledge isn't there and it allows for inaccuracies to be keep ONE off the first tier list.

ONE aired on TNT in 2021 and will soon debut on Prime Video. As they build their brand in the U.S., it is clear they are one of the largest organizations in the sport.

Other Factors

An additional factor to be considered is ONE's multi-sport athlete roster. While inherent biased rankings from sites that focus 99% of their time on the UFC may leave ONE athletes off the list for the most part, ONE also offers Kickboxing, Muay Thai, and Submission Grappling. Their talent in these ranks are indisputable.

Wiki has tons of these athletes with their individual pages, but somehow them competing for ONE still means that ONE is a second-tier organization in the minds of the powers that be. ONE is arguably the top kickboxing organization on the planet currently, and they are the most notable Muay Thai organization.

In the past 12-18 months, they have signed many World Champion grapplers such as Gordon Ryan and Andre Galvao. Garry Tonon, Ruotolo Brothers, Danielle Kelly, and many more are on the roster as well.

Additionally, ONE has ranked ahead of the UFC in several key metrics for viewership and fan engagement per Neilsen's studies. This industry report was posted by many MMA websites. It is interesting how a global promotion, that ranks higher than the UFC in many key elements, is considered a second-tier promotion behind several others who are nowhere even on the list.

ONE competing against the NBA, EPL, and other sports properties only shows its a first-tier level organization. It has the second-highest valuation of martial arts organizations as well.

Conclusion

I understand and respect the attempt at creating a tiered system for promotions, but what is being used to determine that ranking is flawed at best. Mostly, it is woefully outdated. Bringing ONE to Tier One is necessary to reflect where the sport is.

ONE's presence among the namebrand sports properties, global athlete roster across four different martial arts sports, and newly signed broadcast deal all point to it being an undeniable first-tier MMA promotion. There is no logical argument otherwise, except for sticking to the guns of using a site that does not have anywhere near the credibility it had a decade ago (Sherdog) for arbitrary rankings determined by a select few who hold no industry-wide respect. And I love Sherdog, but I have to be fair and admit that it is not the site it was and that there are no credible rankings from another source to use.

Instead, I point to the clear and obvious signs it's a first-tier promotion: global viewership metrics, first-rate athlete contracts, a notable roster of global stars in their chosen sports, and signature broadcast rights deals.

There is a strong, if not ironclad, case to be made that ONE is the #2 promotion behind the UFC in 2022. It should be reflected as a Tier One promotion here as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MMACustodian (talk • contribs) 08:48, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Sources: Proposal: Promote ONE To Tier One

@Papaursa, Ppt1973, Psycho-Krillin, PRehse, Gsfelipe94, Udar55, A.lanzetta, BEDofRAZORS666, Brusinggiant, Sdpdude9, Ticelon, Dwanyewest, Cassiopeia, Eerie Holiday, UFC Cub Beavis, Antumdeluge, Mehrdaad.wiki, Mr.adamgreen, GameRCrom, Bkissin, Powderkegg, Kosbit4, PabloLikesToWrestle, Ikamborden, KINGFEDORQc, GameRCrom, MadjarMMA, Ptkday, Picograms, Diana056, NEDOCHAN, RafaelHP, FFCETT77, RafaelHP, LSS 2552, and .karellian-24:

Hey so I was just gonna post on here since there is currently two sets of pages going on for ONE events. There is the 2022 in ONE Championship event page and also the singular ONE pages, aka like this ONE 156. Eventually there has to be consensus on what is to be done so there isn't so much backlog of pages and links to fix. I saw this post and I am pretty sure this was written by a ONE employee, kinda copies the press releases they have done word for word. In regards to Invicta, I feel like it should be dropped from 1st tier, but we can do a seperate proposal on that. My personal opinion on ONE. I like the product, the kickboxing and Muay thai is high level (and most of their kickboxers and Muay thai guys are already covered by kickboxing notability. It just comes down to the MMA athletes, which truth be told, I don't think the MMA in ONE is that high level. The contract point is mute since I know for a fact and from personal experience that ACA and KSW have binding exclusive contracts. Pinged everyone I had from our last gathering, if there are some new people or others you know who could contribute, go ahead and ping them.HeinzMaster (talk) 05:27, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

I completely agree with HeinzMaster's opinion. Kickboxing and muay thai are top notch but if you look at ie. fightmatrix.com, there are five top15 ranked fighters spread in three divisions: John Lineker, Jarred Brooks, Joshua Pacio, Seo Hee Ham and Angela Lee. In several divisions the best fighters are closer to top50 than top15. That being said, I'm not in favour of promoting ONE Championship to tier one. Ticelon (talk) 06:39, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Agree with what was said above by HeinzMaster and Ticelon. ONE in my opinion currently doesn't have deep enough MMA roster to justify moving them to tier 1. It's undeniable they have some world class MT fighters and kickboxers, but that's still pretty much irrelevant when discussing their MMA notability specifically. I do think however that there is a difference between the level of organizations like ONE or Rizin, and organizations like for example ACA. Maybe splitting orgs into 3 tiers instead 2 would be a good option, I think this was already proposed once by someone. But the rule about world rankings actually covers most ONE fighters notable enough to have wiki page, the only one I can think of right now that doesn't have one and is kind of notable/known among fans is their LW champ Ok Rae Yoon who defeated Alvarez last year. Hence I don't really see any reason to upgrade ONE to first tier. Diana056 (talk) 08:59, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

"I saw this post and I am pretty sure this was written by a ONE employee, kinda copies the press releases they have done word for word."

I am not, but I did pull things in researching and grabbing links so I think some verbiage definitely slid in. Fair enough. Regardless, I would hope the strength of the argument would win out.

"The contract point is mute"

I don't think it's moot, but again fair enough on KSW/ACA mention. As noted in that section, there is significant reason to note that contracts play a crucial role in the hierarchy of martial arts promotions. It's not the whole of the argument, but a piece. When adding that along with the others, I think it just strengthens the claim.

"but if you look at ie. fightmatrix.com"

Again, I revert to how the current ranking systems are incredibly flawed and do not do a great job of accurately portraying the sport on a global level. I think even mentioning that ONE has world-class athletes across all three, now four with the addition of submission grappling, sports they offer is kind of a smoking gun they are a top-tier martial arts promotion. I don't want to belabor the point, but hinging that upon one site that isn't even utilized on any major independent outlet is crazy to me when you look at the totality of everything mentioned above that puts ONE on a level above every other promotion not named the UFC. MMACustodian (talk) 17:16, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

• Comment: This is about MMA guidelines and has nothing to do with grappling and kickboxing as ONE also promotes and ONE fails to meet the guidelines. This is Wikipedia, we mainly record cited independent, reliable sources in our own words, for such we are the editors to record and not judging of the rankings by Fight Matrix or Sherdog are fair or portrayed correctly. Cassiopeia talk 23:15, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your offer, I agree and I see ONE Championship He doesn't have an event page. So I continue. LSS 2552 (talk) 07:55, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Sorry I am late. As a full and long term member I totally support the promotion of ONE Championship to Level 1 UNDER KICKBOXING AND MUAY THAI RULES. .karellian-24 (talk) 12:17, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

kb/mt don't keep the kind of tier list for promotions, nor are they making any decisions on that here. They are talking about MMA. Shadess (talk) 14:12, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Kickboxing And Muay thai are way more notable than mma. So I don't think this discussion is necessary here. Move that to kickboxing section. KINGFEDORQc (talk) 19:19, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

• Comments The existing standard for being a top tier promotion is six fighters ranked in the world top 10, with men and women being counted separately. Don't see that One qualifies. Also, tiers are far less important now that WP:NSPORT has eliminated participation criteria for most, if not all, sports--including MMA. Since either Sherdog or fightmatrix rankings can be used, and both have flaws, I don't see any reason to remove one of them. Papaursa (talk) 02:18, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose As much as I would like to see more mma fighter articles in Wikipedia, ONE doesnt not qualify the current MMA guidelines. MMA guidlines does not inlcude kickboxing. Broadcast deals have nothing to do with qualifying ONE to top tier promotion. If Fight Matrix or Sherdog top ten ranking have some hits and misses that is not for us to change the current guidelines and for us to judge which fighters should be in the top 10. Understanding NPOSRT eliminating of participation criteria is/was in discussion but I dont think SNG has been eliminated as of now. If we have to, drop Invicta to second tier since UFC and Ballator do include women divisions. Cassiopeia talk 04:59, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

ONE event specific pages

I noticed user LSS 2552 has begun creating individual pages for ONE events and would like to enquire what are the Mixed martial arts WikiProject's thoughts on if they are notable enough? Seems unnecessary to me, same as with PFL events having their own pages instead of just a "2022 in PFL" page.

ONE X
ONE: Eersel vs. Sadikovic
Shadess (talk) 21:10, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

I for sure am not updating these pages tho, too much on my hands and also ONE is bad about not announcing anything until the last second or just changing stuff on a whim. So if LSS 2552 wants to do it all by himself, he can knock himself out. HeinzMaster (talk) 06:27, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

I like watching mixed martial arts, kickboxing and muay thai. I see that other organizations with its own event page But why doesn't ONE Championship have its own event, only a page 2022 in ONE Championship So I tried to make my own one event. Thanks You LSS 2552 (talk) 00:33, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

It'd be nice to have the MMA wikiproject members weigh in on this. Seems useless to keep entering duplicate content to wikipedia. Either keep the results and such on the 2022 in ONE Championship page or the individual event pages, not both. :@Papaursa, Ppt1973, Psycho-Krillin, PRehse, Gsfelipe94, Udar55, A.lanzetta, BEDofRAZORS666, Brusinggiant, Sdpdude9, Ticelon, Dwanyewest, Cassiopeia, Eerie Holiday, UFC Cub Beavis, Antumdeluge, Mehrdaad.wiki, Mr.adamgreen, GameRCrom, Bkissin, Powderkegg, Kosbit4, PabloLikesToWrestle, Ikamborden, KINGFEDORQc, GameRCrom, MadjarMMA, Ptkday, Picograms, Diana056, NEDOCHAN, RafaelHP, FFCETT77, RafaelHP, LSS 2552, and .karellian-24:

--Shadess (talk) 14:30, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm not a MMA WikiProject member. If and when the notability standards are changed, let us at Articles for Creation know. Bkissin (talk) 15:04, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Comment I do agree, dear Shadess, it's unnecessary. The MMA part of ONE is far from UFC level, only the Muay Thai and kickboxing belongs to the top of the sport.

--.karellian-24 (talk) 15:34, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Shadess and .karellian-24, ONE Championship's MMA events are far from needing event-specific pages. It's best left on 2022 in ONE Championship, as has been the case with the previous ten years. Ptkday (talk) 14:53, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

I enjoy watching ONE Championship, but apart from maybe large one-off events, I don’t think all MMA events deserve a page. It would be like giving all Eagle FC events their own pages. Maybe in a few years time when the quality is higher and more of their fighters are ranked top 15-20 in the world.

(FFCETT77 (talk) 16:28, 20 May 2022 (UTC))

As of today, I believe that a single page for ONE Championship events is enough. Most of the fighters don't have a page themselves, so why have a page for each event? In the future who knows, but I believe that the current form is adequate. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 14:09, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

I commented on the talk page for ONE 158, but I see this is where the conversation is, so I'm just gonna repeat myself here. I believe we should move to putting up individual pages for each ONE Championship event, instead of relying on the yearly pages such as 2022 in ONE Championship. This is already how it is done for similar organizations like the UFC and Bellator, and I think considering that ONE Championship is definitely on the level of Bellator, and has arguably surpassed them in terms of reputation and viewership, there's no reason not to move them up to individual event pages. Furthermore, ONE has so many high level Muay Thai, kickboxers, and now grappling athletes, that I think even if their MMA talent is on a lower level (which I don't believe it is), the events are notable enough for the other non-MMA bouts to justify their own event page. CalicoMo (talk) 21:30, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Just to touch on the MT/KB part a little, essentially no kickboxing or muay thai events get their own pages on wikipedia. They are all contained in the promotion's yearly pages no matter if it's the highest level Glory cards or anything else. Even if ONE did entirely very high level kb/mt events, they basically wouldn't be getting their own pages so using that as basis for individual pages doesn't hold up. Shadess (talk) 22:00, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

slow speed edit war

To editor Cassiopeia: Per WP:EW, discussion is in order. I'm no party to this, but I find these ongoing reversions worth questioning. Chris Troutman (talk) 23:14, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Chris troutman pls provide page name and message thread/section thread/hist diffs so I may know the nature of EW you mentioned. Thank you. Cassiopeia talk 23:22, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Just now you removed content about external links. You made the same edit a year ago. In October of last year, you reverted content regarding Sherdog to your preferred version and did so again only hours later. I see you are listed as a member of this WikiProject (I am not) and that you've been active on the talk pages for this WikiProject but I don't see conversations discussing these repeated reversions by you, specifically. Chris Troutman (talk) 23:35, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Chris troutman There has not been a consensus approval of using sport link which a discussion had raised before and as per WP:ELMIN, sport links provide too many external links as per guidelines. Cassiopeia talk 00:06, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm not asking for your rationale; I have no dog in this fight. I simply noticed you seem to be repeatedly reverting to your preferred version without discussing the matter with this WikiProject, which isn't collegial or cooperative behavior. I'm not asserting there is or isn't consensus about anything. Chris Troutman (talk) 00:11, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Chris troutman There has not been a consensus approval of using sport link which a discussion had been raised before and as per WP:ELMIN, sport links provide too many external links as per guidelines. Editor involved also tried to add sport link in to one to the MMA template (couldnt find the hist diff as editor involved edited so many templates in Wikipedia and was reverted by an editor (I think it was an admin) and add the RFC/some discussion link of the revert). Cassiopeia talk 00:40, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Grant Neal

Hello everyone! I just became aware of this group and I personally want to thank you all for your amazing contributions to MMA and these athletes. I need help getting a wikipedia page created for Grant Neal. Ranked 9th in Bellator's Light Heavyweight division. Any assistance on this would be greatly appreciated! I'd be willing to make a donation to expedite the process. email is info@aoqsports.com 2603:8001:3C02:2DEF:7495:151E:AE4B:3BE8 (talk) 19:03, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Accepting payment for a wikipedia page is a big no no, also Grant Neal needs two more fights and he will be eligible. HeinzMaster (talk) 19:09, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. I was unaware of the rules regarding payment/donation. My apologies. 2603:8001:3C02:2DEF:7495:151E:AE4B:3BE8 (talk) 20:11, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

New MMA Notability Guidelines

@Papaursa, Ppt1973, Psycho-Krillin, PRehse, Gsfelipe94, Udar55, A.lanzetta, BEDofRAZORS666, Brusinggiant, Sdpdude9, Ticelon, Dwanyewest, Cassiopeia, Eerie Holiday, UFC Cub Beavis, Antumdeluge, Mehrdaad.wiki, Mr.adamgreen, GameRCrom, Bkissin, Powderkegg, Kosbit4, PabloLikesToWrestle, Ikamborden, KINGFEDORQc, GameRCrom, MadjarMMA, Ptkday, Picograms, Diana056, NEDOCHAN, and RafaelHP: Hey, so a slight issue has come up and because all the participation guidelines have been removed, now the MMA notability is just "Have been ranked in the world top 10 in their division by either Sherdog (sherdog.com) or Fight Matrix (fightmatrix.com)." I think we should come together and make some new ones that avoid the participation criteria. I know Papaursa has talked about having a a guideline where if a fighter wins X amount of times in a tier 1 promotion, he is notable, which sounds like a good rule to me. Another posibility is expanding the ranking criteria, ala instead of just top 10, maybe top 25, top 50, etc. Let me know what you guys think. Don't know if I missed anyone, so let me know. HeinzMaster (talk) 20:28, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Pretty sure this is a discussion that would have to be raised at NSPORT, since MMABIO is essentially just essay value. Also having X amount of fights in a top tier promotion is the exact kind of thing NSPORT wanted to remove, that is participation based criteria. ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 21:20, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

(by talk reader) @RafaelHP: Most editors contribute to Wikipedia because they're fans of whatever subject. They naturally seek the advice and support of like-minded folks. Why, if I wanted to protect the articles I like, would I make the political mistake of taking my fandom to a widely-watched guideline where deletionists are likely to pounce? Chris Troutman (talk) 21:24, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

I think participation is only appliable to the previous criteria where it was 3 fights, regardless off if they won all three or lost them all, warranted a wiki page. However if we change it to a fighter has to win 2 times or 3 times, then it's based on accomplishment and not them just participating. I have looked over the other sports and many of them have "qualify for X event" or "place in the top 10 of this event", so having it as you having to win a set amount of bouts would be acceptable. I am only trying to set some new criteria since I find having to be ranked top 10 to be too strict and under that 90% of MMA articles would be open for deletion. Not trying to attack, just trying to work together as you nominated Ian Garry for deletion. HeinzMaster (talk) 03:44, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

I get how the old three fights in a major rule was a bit excessive, but ranked top-ten is definitely too thin. Why not just save ourselves the headache of ever having to do any work ever again and only create pages for UFC champions while we're at it... /sNswix (talk) 23:49, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

I agree that the old rule of 3 fights is vague. Other than obvious reasons (like fighting for a title before that requirement), creating fighters' articles based on 2 wins, 3 fights or top 15 ranking is a good option imo. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 20:17, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

I'd add that media notability should also be taken into consideration. Someone like Paddy Pimblett was receiving too much interest, for months, to have held off as long as we had to. Nswix (talk) 00:23, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Another valid point. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 22:37, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

• Comments As someone who has been in on MMA notability discussions since they started (2010), I feel I bring a unique long term perspective on this topic. The reason for the top 10 benchmark is because it's been the standard for all the major fighting sports (boxing, MMA, and kickboxing). That's particularly relevant since boxing has such a long history. Also, whatever is decided by the MMA project will still need to be discussed and approved at WT:NSPORT if you want to change the NSPORT notability criteria. Requiring several wins may, or may not, circumvent the demise of participation criteria--I honestly don't know. The gold standard is still meeting WP:GNG, which shows WP notability regardless of field or SNG criteria. Personally, I don't go looking for MMA articles to delete but I will vote on them using whatever the existing criteria are. I think many of the existing MMA articles will not survive an AfD discussion using the current criteria, at least in their present state. I think anyone writing a new article or who is a fan of a particular fighter should be preemptive and make sure those articles can withstand an AfD challenge. For some active fighters who are still climbing the ranks, it may be prudent to userfy their articles to save what currently exists. Trying to claim notability based on what they might achieve is generally doomed to fail. Papaursa (talk) 02:45, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose new guidelines the 3-fight criteria is far superior to the ranking for multiple reasons: the former criteria is concrete, while the ranking system is fluid and constantly changing, in some organizations almost on a weekly bases. The top ten system is also skewed towards divisions with smaller pools of fighters, such as high weight women's divisions. As mentioned by a couple editors above, this sudden change in notability guidelines has resulted in many article suddenly being deemed no notable, with the coming onslaught of potential AFDs being disruptive. Inter&anthro (talk) 08:40, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
• Comments I'm not a huge fan of the new notability guidelines. A lot of MMA pages will be wiped out this way. Its not exactly easy to make top 10 in the UFC. Its also unfair as its far easier to make top 10 in the Heavyweight division compared to Bantamweight or Lightweight. Not to mention rankings are subjective. The 3 fight in a Top tier promotion requirement was pretty straightforward. If we want to decrease the number of low quality fighters, maybe we should add in must have at least 2 wins in a top tier promotion as some have mentioned. -Imcdc (talk) 01:09, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Removal of full names

I noticed there was a batch of full names and their references (from Nevada Athletic Commission) removed on the grounds of WP:BLPNAME and WP:BLPPRIMARY. Articles like Henry Cejudo, Dominick Cruz, Tyron Woodley, Dustin Poirier. After quickly checking out athlete articles ie. Mike Tyson, Kobe Bryant, Wayne Gretzky and Tiger Woods to name a few, their full names were there even without sources. I kind of understand the reasoning behind the edits, but shouldn't all the aforementioned second names etc be removed as unsourced, or how do they differ from mixed martial artists? I'm honestly just trying to figure things out before I go on an unsourced second name editing rampage throughout the WP. Ticelon (talk) 14:53, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Ping @Papaursa, Ppt1973, Psycho-Krillin, PRehse, Gsfelipe94, Udar55, A.lanzetta, BEDofRAZORS666, Brusinggiant, Sdpdude9, Ticelon, Dwanyewest, Cassiopeia, Eerie Holiday, UFC Cub Beavis, Antumdeluge, Mehrdaad.wiki, Mr.adamgreen, GameRCrom, Bkissin, Powderkegg, Kosbit4, PabloLikesToWrestle, Ikamborden, KINGFEDORQc, GameRCrom, MadjarMMA, Ptkday, Picograms, Diana056, NEDOCHAN, and RafaelHP: Ticelon (talk) 08:13, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

I've noticed this. I have no idea why editors are removing the full names and it seems like they've misunderstood both guidelines.NEDOCHAN (talk) 09:12, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

It's simply a misunderstanding of BLP:NAME and poor editing.

Caution should be applied when identifying individuals who are discussed primarily in terms of a single event.

By definition, the above doesn't apply to any MMA fighter pages, as they're not discussed primarily in terms of a single event. I would support reverting all these edits and restoring their names.NEDOCHAN (talk) 09:19, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

No, I dont think its a misunderstanding of BLPPrimary. It's made pretty clear primary sources (i.e court records, public documents) must be accompanied by secondary sources. ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 11:26, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

To be safe though I'll ask some questions at BLP Noticeboard before I remove any more full names. ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 11:31, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

You've misunderstood both guidelines. BLP Name is about not identifying individuals who aren't notable other than from their involvement in an event that has an article about it. Primary is about not drawing conclusions based on your research of primary sources.

Neither guideline says delete names of people who are the subject of articles. NEDOCHAN (talk) 14:35, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

This comes up at BLPN regularly and the consensus is (nearly) always that this level of detail should be removed unless supported by reliable, secondary sources—as is the case for the current discussion there. Per BLPPRIVACY, full names and dates of birth need to be sourced to reliable, secondary sources, or self-published in a way that it's clear the subject doesn't mind it being out there. ("Hey, it's my 25th birthday today" or something along those lines.) BLPPRIMARY makes it clear that primary sources like public documents aren't enough. Woodroar (talk) 18:03, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Neither of those two policies apply to this case. BLPNAME is about private persons whose names are not relevant to the context in which they are mentioned, not about public figures who are literally subject of the article. Primary sources may be used if they are reliably published and the info taken from them are straightforward facts that can be easily verified by anyone. They must be supplied by secondary sources only if the information from them requires interpretation, which is not the case here. Diana056 (talk) 18:01, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

I mentioned this at the BLP noticeboard, but these names don't appear to even have primary sources. Wikipedia:Verifiability is a core policy overriding pretty much anything else. Henry Cejudo doesn't have a reference for a birth name, nor a full name. There's a reference to a name he used in a fight. At best it's a reference for a 'other name'. The solution here is to find and add references supporting the thing being said. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 18:56, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

The name reference used in Cejudo's article, as well as most others, are official documents released by the athletic commissions under whose jurisdiction they fought. So it's not just a name they used in a fight, it's their official legal name at the time of the fight which they provided to the commission. Although secondary sources would obviously be better, this is imo an acceptable primary source. Diana056 (talk) 22:06, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

I mentioned elsewhere that I'd personally find it acceptable for a 'fight name', 'stage name', or whatever they're called. Saying it's a legal name sounds a bit like original research, as you've concluded from somewhere that it's an 'official legal name'. It still doesn't reference a birth name. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:19, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

I've little to add other than that I agree with Diana056's interpretation of the guidelines.NEDOCHAN (talk) 19:53, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm not going to say that I disagree with that interpretation, as I'm of the opinion that it can be sometimes made to fit. However, I'd have hoped that you'd surely agree that policy requires references, and that these facts are not referenced. Let's take another example, Dominick Cruz. Where is the reference - any reference - stating his name at birth? -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 20:05, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Are you surprised? I won't say names, but there is one person whose whole contribution to MMA wiki is deleting content. Never done anything else. HeinzMaster (talk) 20:10, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

As mentioned as BLPN, it's inappropriate to use primary sources for sourcing names of living person. This needs to stop as they're serious BLP violations. These are the sort of things which sometimes justify rev-deletion. Note that even outside names primary sources should very rarely be used in BLPs even if the details do not require interpretation. BLP is far stricter with the use of primary source, so do not confuse the two. Even simple things like fight results should not generally be sourced exclusively to primary sources. Note that if details keep getting deleted because they're inappropriately sourced, the solution is either to successfully change our policy on BLP and RS, or stop inappropriately sourcing details. Wikiprojects should be aiming to ensure their editing complies with our policies (and guidelines) rather than developing a local consensus which ignores it. If you see a wikiproject regular causing problems by adding details without suitable sources or with unsuitable sources, then caution them. Worst case scenario if they keep at it, bring up a case at AN for them to be blocked. This will help improve Wikipedia and help improve this Wikiproject. Nil Einne (talk) 20:44, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

It's unfortunate that WP:MMA has grown a bit of a reputation for ignoring guidelines and changes. 80% atleast of fighter articles with full names are sourced with primary sources, rarely ever accompied by secondary sourcing. I site policy and remove the inappropriately sourced content, and people start calling me unconstructive. It's quite frustrating. ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 06:28, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

I am done

@Papaursa, Ppt1973, Psycho-Krillin, PRehse, Gsfelipe94, Udar55, A.lanzetta, BEDofRAZORS666, Brusinggiant, Sdpdude9, Ticelon, Dwanyewest, Cassiopeia, Eerie Holiday, UFC Cub Beavis, Antumdeluge, Mehrdaad.wiki, Mr.adamgreen, GameRCrom, Bkissin, Powderkegg, Kosbit4, PabloLikesToWrestle, Ikamborden, KINGFEDORQc, GameRCrom, MadjarMMA, Ptkday, Picograms, Diana056, NEDOCHAN, and RafaelHP:

Anyway, with the recent things happening on the MMA wiki project, I am done. Tofiq Musayev got deleted even tho I added more sources and it clearly passed GNG but the sources were in non-English, so alas. Kinda hard to create an article that isn't like the old one and supposedly adding more sources isn't enough. I genuinely hope 99% of MMA articles are deleted while you can create a page for every random football, soccer, basketball player on earth. Peace. HeinzMaster (talk) 20:36, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry you take offense to me deleting articles. It really isnt anything personal, but you're choosing to ignore the fact that the NSPORT guidelines were changed. If I see an article that I think doesnt meet the guidelines, what am I supposed to do? You always have the opportunity to prove your pages meet GNG by the way, and if they dont that's not anyone's fault. I have created a draft before (which you accepted as an article). ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 20:44, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

I'd also like to point out I had literally nothing to do with Tofiq Musayev's page being deleted. ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 20:46, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

In a round about way you did since you attracted the attention of the wikipedia internet janitors. But don't worry, now you can create every article. HeinzMaster (talk) 20:49, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

How? In any case if an admin decided that your page wasn't even worth another AfD process, I don't see how in anyway that's my fault. ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 20:58, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Because that admin got upset with another thing I did in relation to one of your decisions and to spite me decided to nominate the page for speedy deletion. They already threatened me with instant block within 5 seconds over a simple mistake that I was in the process of undoing. None of this matters tho, now you have a chance to contribute. HeinzMaster (talk) 21:03, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps not directly with Musayev's page, but indirectly with just about every MMA fighter's page that was created in the past few months. Good luck in nominating further pages for deletion. Ptkday (talk) 00:39, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Heinz you're an asset to the project and I hope you stay. I continue to be baffled by Rafael's approach to editing. I'm afraid they're a lost cause. You're not, though, so please stick around.NEDOCHAN (talk) 10:07, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm baffled by your continuance of only using one source for fight records. ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 10:41, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Using the reference in the infobox baffles you?! I can't see any members of the project leaving on my account, though. Maybe we're all wrong and you're the only one who understands how you're helping.NEDOCHAN (talk) 12:27, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Yeah that's more an issue of NSPORT cutting our guidelines down. I dont like them, but I will follow them as this is Wikipedia. Even despite all the incivility I've been getting for following standard policy, I'm gonna continue to uphold it, and if anyone doesnt like that, again that's an issue with NSPORT. Eventually people are gonna start deleting articles if we dont get them changed, so blaming me solves nothing. ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 14:20, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

I am very sorry to hear that HeinzMaster, but at the same time I completely understand and share your frustration. As of now, I have completely refrained myself from creating new articles due to the senseless NSPORT guideline. I am also seriously considering completely retiring from WP:MMA because some users enforce WP:NSPORT and WP:GNG so fervently that it's impossible to guess what is enough to reach significant coverage. What I am most afraid of is that by enforcing these guidelines, we will lose a huge chunk of the history of the sport because the articles of Japanese and Brazilian pioneers of the sport (Vale Tudo tournaments, Pankration, RINGS, Deep, Pancrase etc) don't necessarily fulfill the requirements due to lack of contemporary references in ie. English. I have a list of articles that I am going to significantly revamp before calling it a day unless something changes. Ticelon (talk) 15:05, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

It shouldn't matter that some sources are not in English, it's not a valid deletion rationale although I occasionally see editors nominating articles for deletion state this. Google Translate isn't perfect but it can give the sense of the coverage in an article. The part that is harder than translating the content of the reference is knowing whether the sources would be what we consider to be reliable or not. But this issue comes up with articles in not only other sports but many other subjects as well as there are entire fields of study and society that are not covered by English language publications.

Regarding the current turmoil at AFD discussions, I just want to encourage that more people who are knowledgeable about Mixed Martial Arts participate in AFD discussions to balance out those who regularly voice their opinion at AFDs but who may not know much about the people, the events, the sport or the sources of information. I know that deletion discussions take away time that could be spent creating or improving articles but we really need more people participating at AFDs on subjects that interest you. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:53, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Part of the problem is that some people don't even realize that the NSPORT guidelines were changed, or just don't like that the guidelines were cut down. For example when nominating articles like David Onama, Ronnie Lawrence for deletion, multiple people kept asking about the old "3 fight rule" guideline, despite it having been changed in March. ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 16:13, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

@HeinzMaster: I understand your frustration... I just hope you reconsider it, despite the current situation. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 04:22, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

@HeinzMaster: I'm sorry to see you leave, but understand. I've never figured out why some editors will mark articles for deletion based on "lack of sources" instead of just adding sources to them, where possible. The notability excuse is also weird for me, as there are active discussions trying to recodify the notability guidelines. I hope you'll stay on the battle line. There are never enough soldiers on it. CLalgo (talk) 09:16, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

@HeinzMaster and RafaelHP:

• RafaelHP, I speak here as the Wikipedia newpage trainer here the NMMA is under NSPORT and NSPORT is under GNG, when you nominated a page for AfD, you should not only looking at if the subject passes NSPORT or NMMA but more IMPORTANTLY to do a WP:BEFORE prior nominate the page. Editor should do their upmost to improve the article, adding sources to get the page pass GNG "first" and not because the current article does not appear to meet the guidelines above. Wikipedia accept sources in ANY LANGUGES as long as they are independent, reliable sources. We the new page reviewers often use Google translate to review articles. Pls again, do the BEFORE and find sources to improve the article to achieve notability guidelines first prior doing a AfD. I suggest you to move the article to draft space instead of AfD as the subjects usually would be notable in the future and all the work done on the articles (content and sources) does not go wasted. Cassiopeia talk 09:48, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

• Hi HeinMaster, I was absent for some day and just notice your destress message after cleaning hundreds of edits and reviews. Apologies for my delay in responding to your message on my talk page. Since I am here, I will reply you here instead. I understand your frustration for and understand how much work you spent on creating all the articles as I was the one creating the mma fighter articles prior you started editing. All the research, source searching, adding tables, content as it takes days work for a short article to form. I can represent the MMA editors in Wikipedia to say we appreciate and thank you for your work, time spent, dedication, team work, civil behavior, collaboration, and much much more. For those who have been editing MMA related pages for a long time, would know at times it is very frustrated and upset when certain things do not go well. PLEASE DON'T GO (I saw your edits for the last two days so I take it as a good sign) - take a break from creating UFC fighter articles, edit lesser or edit content on existing mma UFC fighters and event pages. For those deleted articles where Papaursa participate, you can be sure it fails GNG as Papaursa would always do a BEFORE prior voting the AfD. You can always ask for a WP:REFUND for your deleted article so you may keep a copy on the draft page so the content go to waste until the subject is notable. The RUFEND can be requested from the admin who deleted the articles at the AfD and do state your reasons. (Note: you need to edit at least one time from the last edit made on the draft page and if not the page will be nominated for G13 and will be deleted) Once again, we thank you for your contribution and please come to my talk page if you need anything or any helps or just to vent. Take good care. Cassiopeia talk

Should the style param be used?

Should the style parameter in the infobox be used at all? By its very nature it makes no sense. To give an example, Jose Aldo's fighting style is listed as BJJ, which is contrary to the way he actually fights. This makes the style parameter in effect misleading. Thoughts? TBMNY (talk) 11:58, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

I think WPMMA:STYLE deals with it well. Aldo obviously shouldn't be down as BJJ.NEDOCHAN (talk) 13:35, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

@NEDOCHAN I think he should under the current way it's done. He has won in BJJ tournaments. TBMNY (talk) 22:34, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Per WP:MMA/MOS, the style parameter should only be used if the athlete has completed professionally in other sports. So for example someone like Michael Chandler has his style as wrestling because he formerly competed as a NCAA Division 1 wrestler, or someone like Ronaldo Souza, his style is BJJ becuase he won numerous gold medals in Brazilian Jiu Jitsu tournaments. Interpretation for styles should not be used, if a fighter displays boxing skills in a fight but has no achievements in the sport or professional record, their style would remain blank. ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 18:16, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

I agree. ^ NEDOCHAN (talk) 19:21, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

@RafaelHP Under the current language, Michael Chandler arguably shouldn't count. College wrestling isn't professional nor is it an international competition. TBMNY (talk) 22:38, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

I agree that Chandler shouldn't be Wrestling. I don't think Aldo has won international BJJ tournaments and I don't think there would be an article about him if he weren't an MMA fighter. So I would support not including the parameter for either of them.NEDOCHAN (talk) 16:51, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

In the case of Aldo, he won a bronze medal in the World Jiu Jitsu championships, medaled gold in a different tournament. It might be valid to include BJJ in his style, though it's not accurate to how he fights in MMA. ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 21:12, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

I think the guidelines give 2 things to consider. First is whether they've competed internationally or professionally. In addition one needs to consider whether they'd warrant an article for their status in the style. I'd argue McGregor does because he was half of the second biggest professional boxing match there's ever been. Not sure Aldo would and Chandler almost certainly wouldn't.NEDOCHAN (talk) 22:39, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

@NEDOCHAN Wouldn't the ranks for each discipline be enough for nearly everyone? Like even for someone who would arguably would merit an article on their own, such as Brock. There's already a wrestling parameter that says "

NCAA Division I Wrestling" for him. Putting "wrestling" as his style seems redundant. Or the case of Rodolfo Vieira, his rank is already listed as a black belt in BJJ. It's just all redundant. The rank and wrestling categories nearly solve all the problems that "style" has. TBMNY (talk) 14:39, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

I don't think so, actually. A lot of MMA fighters have BJJ black belts, for instance, but they're not BJJ fighters in the way that people like Jacare and Maia are. I think the style parameter remains useful as it shows when fighters have crossed over to MMA following their achievements in other disciplines. The main thing to avoid (and I think the original purpose of the guideline) is people amateurishly trying to summarise an MMA fighter's style. Sometimes I've deleted about 6 from a single fighter! Izzy and Wonderboy are kickboxers. Cormier is a wrestler. Souza is a BJJ player. Holm is a boxer. GSP is none. It all makes sense to me so I'm inclined to leave as is. The main question imo is 'would this fighter have an article about them if they had never crossed over to MMA?'. I think in every instance above (except GSP), they would.NEDOCHAN (talk) 15:40, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Proposed addition for nickname in the infobox

@Papaursa, Ppt1973, Psycho-Krillin, PRehse, Gsfelipe94, Udar55, A.lanzetta, BEDofRAZORS666, Brusinggiant, Sdpdude9, Ticelon, Dwanyewest, Cassiopeia, Eerie Holiday, UFC Cub Beavis, Antumdeluge, Mehrdaad.wiki, Mr.adamgreen, GameRCrom, Bkissin, Powderkegg, Kosbit4, PabloLikesToWrestle, Ikamborden, KINGFEDORQc, GameRCrom, MadjarMMA, Ptkday, Picograms, Diana056, NEDOCHAN, and RafaelHP:

Can I propose the following guideline to be added? This would be the second bullet point after 'Don't use flag icons'.

- Other name(s)/ Nickname(s). Some fighters have (an) official nickname(s). In order to decide whether to include a nickname, or nicknames, in the infobox, please see the Sherdog source linked in the infobox. If the source gives the nickname, please include it in the relevant infobox parameter. The information must be sourced to an independent, reliable fighter profile (i.e. Sherdog or ESPN). Do not use unofficial nicknames in the infobox or those that are not cited in a fighter profile page. If they are sourced, other names can be included in the article body (but not the infobox).

What do we think? NEDOCHAN (talk) 12:38, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Powderkegg (talk) 22:40, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

So to make sure I understand this correctly, are you proposing that only Sherdog should be used as a primary source for fighters nickname in the infobox, or it can be any reliable and independent fighter profile (i.e. UFC profile, ESPN, Tapology) ? I'm asking this specifically because of the edits I saw you made on the Amanda Nunes article. If your proposal is the former, I definitely disagree. Like in the case of Nunes, if practically every other source except Sherdog lists a different nickname, then I see zero reason to rigidly cling at every cost only to what one specific website says, and I think this insistence on one source above all others defeats the purpose of Wikipedia, where information ideally should be supported by multiple reliable sources. When I look at the infobox, I also see that it's explicitly stated there that the Sherdog source linked at the bottom refers to the fighters MMA record and nothing else. Other information in the infobox always requires a separate source for itself, which usually ends up being from an array of different publications, and I don't really get why the nickname part should be any different. Diana056 (talk) 15:51, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't understand this proposal one bit. There's literally no point in making Sherdog the only and only source for infobox nicknames, as you tried to make it with records. If they are published by independent and reliable sources, they can go in the infobox. Side note; Sherdog is considered less reliable than ESPN and generally reliable sources, and should be used with caution per this consensus. ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 16:10, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

@Diana056: - thanks for your input. First off, let's treat this discussion independently of any specific article or edits. Nunes is a tricky one as it really comes down to how you translate Portuguese, which doesn't use articles in the same way as English. So that you understand correctly, I am suggesting that yes, in the vast majority of cases, Sherdog should be the source of the nickname in the infobox. As I have tried to convey in the proposed guideline, the information has to come from a reliable, independent source. So the UFC is out immediately. First, it is obviously not independent, it's the exact opposite. Secondly, it also only lists UFC fighters. So that's an obvious 'no'.

The reason I think we should insist on 'proper' fighter profile pages is to avoid listing 'new' or silly nicknames. Some fighters (Josh Barnett for instance) also have loads of nicknames; if we attempt to list every one, the whole thing will become a mess and the reader won't know what their 'proper' nickname is. Now of course I am not saying these can't be included (if sourced) in the article, I am talking specifically about the infobox. Infoboxes are not compulsory, so we do have leeway to use them to present info the community feels is most relevant. As a case in point, we don't use the 'style' parameter except in a few cases, although it would be possible to find a source that describes Stephen Thompson's style as 'karate'.

I understand your concern about the name of the infobox link, although I dispute that it 'explicitly' states it refers to 'nothing else' (otherwise it would explicitly state it referred to nothing else). It is a link to an independent source in an infobox and it really helps make things easy to verify and keep things tidy.

As for ESPN, their commercial ties with the UFC (albeit not as of today, as far as we know) have compromised their independence, and I know a few editors are hesitant to use it for that reason.

If we are to avoid the infoboxes becoming cluttered and, worse, filled with jokey, meme-like nicknames, we need to have a guideline to follow. At present - in contrast to the 'Style' parameter, we don't have a guideline to address the nickname parameter. The above is my suggestion. NEDOCHAN (talk) 14:03, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

What about Edmond Tarverdyan?

Does anyone think Edmond Tarverdyan should have an article Coach may have doomed Ronda Rousey's fight, career (usatoday.com), Leading a Local Fighting Surge (latimes.com), How Ronda Rousey and coach Edmond Tarverdyan became UFC's perfect pair | FOX Sports, Coach may have doomed Ronda Rousey's fight, career (usatoday.com), The night Edmond Tarverdyan broke down and cried - The Athletic, CSAC revokes corner license of Edmond Tarverdyan for allegedly falsifying application regarding arrest - MMA Fighting, Ronda Rousey's coach claims bankruptcy, trustee pursues GFC for liquidation - Bloody Elbow Dwanyewest (talk) 18:35, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

He's a goofy dude and unlikeable, but I think he deserves an article HeinzMaster (talk) 22:27, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

HeinzMaster (talk) I guess I will start the article as I respect your opinion. Dwanyewest (talk) 23:20, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

KO vs TKO sourcing dispute

Hello, members of this WikiProject may be interested in this discussion as there is currently a dispute around contradictory sources in regards to how an MMA fight ended. Thanks. — Czello 19:56, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

What about Laura Sanko?

Does anyone think that Laura Sanko should get a MMA article as she has now become a MMA color commentator. Dwanyewest (talk) 21:19, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

• Support Nswix (talk) 21:55, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Icons#RfC Can notable Brazilian jiu-jitsu people display a rank icon in their infobox like Judo people do?

Please comment at the subject RfC. Lewolka (talk) 15:26, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Banning Websites that MMA salaries and "supposed" PPV views.

Websites like MMAsalaries.com just make up numbers and the information is not reported on by any more reputable sources. I think we should have a blanket ban on these sources and don't know the procedure to institute that. I found a ton of fake PPV buy numbers being added by Bierbaub who I am pretty sure has some connection since his only contributions are posted them onto the pages of MMA fighters. HeinzMaster (talk) 17:44, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

• I don't know how we'd come up with a list, but I like this for the same reason I dislike people ref-ing anything but Forbes or Bloomberg when it comes to peoples earnings/net worth. Journalists either hear a rumor or pull a random number out of the air and report it, and people think they can just Google someone's numbers and then post them. Nswix (talk) 06:56, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

A lot of the sources being used state that the payouts and numbers displayed are estimates, and yet they are still used. ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 19:12, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Help editing a good submission.

Just curious what else I need to improve if anyone wants to add on for Vilson Ndregjoni Draft:Vilson Ndregjoni Arian9301 (talk) 01:50, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Fighter has to meet WP:MMABIO, which this fighter doesn't, yet. Nswix (talk) 18:14, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Hey Nswix, what exactly do I need to do to meet MMABIO, I clicked on it but I am still unsure. Arian9301 (talk) 00:36, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

You don’t need to do anything, Vilson just needs to actually get wins so he is notable. All your sources are just database links from Tapology or the like, he places in the 20s in all his wrestling competitions, he just isn’t notable at the moment HeinzMaster (talk) 01:33, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Vilson is no longer an active wrestler, being a pro mma fighter is his career. Vilson just claimed his 7th pro win and championship title on April 1 in the CFFC which is on the UFC Fight Pass. I am just unsure really what the requirements are because I see MANY fighters with approved wikipedia pages with less fights and no notability whatsoever. Is there a reason for that? Arian9301 (talk) 23:19, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

So what is your connection to him? No he is not notable. The highest he has ever been ranked in the world is in the 400s. [1] CFFC is not a major promotion. I don't care that it's on UFC Fight Pass, there are amatuer bouts on UFC Fight pass. Also care to point at some examples of these "MANY" fighters who are less notable then him? HeinzMaster (talk) 23:22, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

This makes sense, I appreciate the feedback. I will continue to update whenever possible. Arian9301 (talk) 23:33, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments

Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:33, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Draft:1987 Wrestling World Cup

Tom Erikson (born July 6, 1964) is an American former amateur wrestler and mixed martial artist who competed in the super heavyweight division. Tom Erikson was 2nd in the World Cup in Mongolia.

Kenny Dale Monday (born November 25, 1961) is an Olympic gold medalist and three-time All-American wrestler from Oklahoma State University. On March 28, 1997, Monday competed in a mixed martial arts bout defeating John Lewis by TKO in round two at Extreme fighting 4, which was held in Des Moines, Iowa.

In 1986, he won the National Wrestling Hall of Fame Classic and took both the Sunkist International Open the the World Cup the following year.

Hello. I have added new references to independent sources. These sources disclose information "Draft:1987 Wrestling World Cup", in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject), These sources is reliable, secondary, independent of the subject. Also see the new notes "Draft talk:1987 Wrestling World Cup". I hope for a positive decision on the project Tschin As (talk) 00:18, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:ONE Championship#Requested move 17 April 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:ONE Championship#Requested move 17 April 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – MaterialWorks 22:57, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Credibility bot

As this is a highly active WikiProject, I would like to introduce you to Credibility bot. This is a bot that makes it easier to track source usage across articles through automated reports and alerts. We piloted this approach at Wikipedia:Vaccine safety and we want to offer it to any subject area or domain. We need your support to demonstrate demand for this toolkit. If you have a desire for this functionality, or would like to leave other feedback, please endorse the tool or comment at WP:CREDBOT. Thanks! Harej (talk) 18:14, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:John Dodson (fighter)#Requested move 12 August 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:John Dodson (fighter)#Requested move 12 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 07:54, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Lupita Godinez § Requested move 17 September 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Lupita Godinez § Requested move 17 September 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 19:14, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

PFL formating

@Papaursa, Ppt1973, Psycho-Krillin, PRehse, Gsfelipe94, Udar55, A.lanzetta, BEDofRAZORS666, Brusinggiant, Sdpdude9, Ticelon, Dwanyewest, Cassiopeia, Eerie Holiday, UFC Cub Beavis, Antumdeluge, Mehrdaad.wiki, Mr.adamgreen, GameRCrom, Bkissin, Powderkegg, Kosbit4, PabloLikesToWrestle, Ikamborden, KINGFEDORQc, GameRCrom, MadjarMMA, Ptkday, Picograms, Diana056, NEDOCHAN, RafaelHP, FFCETT77, RafaelHP, LSS 2552, .karellian-24, Nswix, Fixer88, AddedUpdatePoster, and PowrotKrola:

Hey Hey, I am just messaging regarding how to format the events for the fighter records, at this point we are doing PFL 1, 2, 3, 4, for every year. However it just blends together. I think it should be PFL 1 (2021), PFL 2 (2021), etc. Just to differentiate the events on the fighter records. Likewise, with the merger of Bellator and PFL, should we merge the "List of current X fighter" pages or keep the pages seperate? HeinzMaster (talk) 03:08, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

I say keep the 'current fighter' pages separate, especially as they've announced they're going to run the promotions separately. Nswix (talk) 03:12, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

As stated by Nswix, the current fighter pages should remain separate since the promotions are not merging, rather operating simultaneously. In regards to the titling of events, I don't really have an opinion over removing "season" from the year dates. ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 03:57, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Since the still work separate, the "currant fighters lists" should keep at they are until such a day when the all the fighters are under one umbrella. As of event name proposal, I support. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 05:57, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

I agree with all of the above. Keep the fighters lists separate until the promotions actually merge and modify the event names. GameRCrom (talk) 19:49, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

I agree with everyone above. Keep them separate as they're indeed different promotions under a same management. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 15:23, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

I've also just noticed the way some articles were updated... I do believe simply having the year alongise the event works easily. There are events titled as "PFL 10: 2023 Season PFL Championships" for example and I believe that's too long. Not everyone is fighting for a championship or a playoff, those situations will definitely be mentioned on the notes section. I suggest just keeping "PFL 10 (2023) or (2023 season) for example". That's cleaner and easier to read. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 15:27, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Is this fighter notable now?

Maiju Suotama has officially now fought once in Strikeforce and twice in Invicta. Is Maiju Suotama now a good candidate to have a wikipedia article created? Dwanyewest (talk) 11:33, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Fighting in top tier promotions isn’t apart of the criteria anymore. ♡RAFAEL♡^(talk) 21:28, 28 December 2023 (UTC)