Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Sport Combat Federation (2nd nomination)

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

The result was delete. JForget 03:37, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

International Sport Combat Federation

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

Previously deleted article that was recreated with substantially the same info. Speedy was declined because an admin restored it. A few additions, mostly from a single source (sherdog.com). Article claims 6 references. 2 are the orgs own website, 1 is a MMA sites blog and 3 are sherdog.com. 1 of the 3 doesn't even mention the org at all. One only says they sanctioned an event. An editor claiming to represent the org first vandalized the last AfD with a lengthy rant. Then he posted to the closing admins talk page [1] where he attacked anyone who !voted delete. I provided him links to some applicable WP policies and guidlines. His response was to attack me and tell me he doesn't have time to read the policies. Fails WP:ORG. There is a lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. The article that they are able to sanction fight in one state is the most substantial one, and it it only partially about them. One is an insignificant mention and the 3rd doesn't mention them at all. I suggested to the editor that had the article restored that he find his sources first, but he hasn't responded. So here we are. Niteshift36 (talk) 22:44, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This isn't a question of whether or not they exist. It is a question of notability that can be verified by reliable sources. Niteshift36 (talk) 23:35, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Google search provides meager results; mostly coverage of local promotions whom they have sanctioned and very brief descriptions of the organization. No major new coverage of the organization. Appears to be relatively non-notable, IMO. --TreyGeek (talk) 23:47, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Aspirations do not make notability, with only one sanctioned event not notable yet. --Nate^t/_c 11:42, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Where do you see that they've sanctioned but one event? They've sanctioned hundreds of events according to Sherdog.

Keep They have hundreds of events listed on Sherdog, which is the most-recognised news source for mixed martial arts in the English-speaking world ocee^{Conas tá tú?} 23:51, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ocee, you're missing the point. They could sanction all the events they want, that doesn't make the organization notable. What is lacking is coverage of the organization. For example, there is plenty of coverage about the World Boxing Council. Their notability isn't based on what they sanction, it's based on their coverage. The primary criteria under WP:ORG is "has been the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources." The criteria goes on to state: "The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources should be cited to establish notability." Being listed as the sanctioning entity on sherdog is NOT significant coverage. Niteshift36 (talk) 00:51, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I am not an expert on the MMA scene, so I stand open to correction, but this organisation does not seem notable. Based on its current state and sources, it fails WPMA/N. Janggeom (talk) 01:20, 14 January 2010 (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.