Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Damir Ismagulov

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Draftify. Consensus that he fails notability but could meet it in the near future. Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:07, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Damir Ismagulov

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Subject is an MMA Fighter. Fails WP:NMMA notability requirements. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 14:44, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 14:44, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 14:44, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 14:44, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As per nominator.PRehse (talk) 10:41, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's true he fails to meet WP:NMMA. However, his victory last night in his first UFC fight almost guarantees he'll get at least two more fights with them--barring injury, suspension, or similar event. I understand that's WP:CRYSTALBALL, but it's why I'm hesitant to vote delete on someone who I think is likely to be notable relatively soon. If I was forced to make a decision, I'd have to vote delete at this time but I was thinking it might be better to put it into draft space instead of deleting it. Papaursa (talk) 19:07, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Inter&#38|Papaursa|PRehse Thank you for your comments and interest in this article AfD. I understand the reason behind of draftifing the page instead of deletion. I have drafting a few pages before in the past. However, the reason to nominationn for AfD instead of draftiying is that for the fighter to meet the WP:NMMA means the fighter needs to fight another 2 more fights provided their contract is not less than 3 fights. A draft would only stays in the system for 6 months before it is deleted which means not only the subject need be booked and fought 2 more fights within next six months provided the subject and their opponent do not pulled out due to injuries before the fights and the medical suspension after a fight is in its minimum duration. All this is WP:CRYSTALBALL and we know that in the fight game, anything could happen even on the fight day. Secondly, if a dratified page moves back to main space by confirmed user, we can not re dratify as as the "draft" copy of the small subject is existed and we still need to get back to AfD process. It is much easy to recreate the page when NMMA is met as we the reveiwer just nee to click check on the review button.

I truly believe an editor create a fighter article without the knowledge of the WP:NMMA requirements and I am one of them where I have created a few fighter articles when I started joining Wikipedia family before I found out there is a Wikipedia:WikiProject Mixed martial arts and WP:NMMA requirements. The things here is "consistency" applying WP:NMMA. Since the guidelines have been set and if we dont apply them consistently and allowing one article to draftied the the other to be AfD deleted, then we would face editors stating our biasness and setting a case for them to attack the guidelines. If a page fighter page fails WP:NMMA and has not been AfD and allows the fighter meets the WP:NMMA which most likely it will happen that is another things. Since there are only a handful of gate keepers in MMA project in AfD, I hope to reach an understanding of agreement in consistency for I would not want to AfD a page where it is not call for or it is not the practice of of following WP:NMMA guidelines for I do not want to have a misunderstanding or work against each other since we are a small group here in AfD MMA. All I want is collaboration and work in good will. I have give my 2c and I need to know where we stand. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 09:32, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify - mostly per the same reasoning Papaursa gave above, subject doesn't appear to meet WP:NMMA but there is a good chance he will in the near future. WP:TOOSOON if anything. Inter&anthro (talk) 01:11, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify per Papaursa. A lot of work went into the article, and if the chance of meeting notability requirements at WP:NMMA are imminent, it would be a shame to lose it. Ifnord (talk) 19:38, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:14, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jovanmilic97 (talk) 12:55, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify per above. Likely to be notable soon, but not yet. Smartyllama (talk) 21:41, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:GNG, coverage in sources given is trivial Uninvited Company 20:48, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.