Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Henle
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 no consensus. --auburnpilot talk 04:15, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Joseph Henle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Henle has only competed in 3 pro fights, all against opponents with terrible records. He fought on The Ultimate Fighter, barely won his fight to get into the show then lost his next fight eliminating him from the tournament. He also trains at a small gym, that is not known by many. Basically, he is in no way notable. RapidSpin33 (talk) 03:18, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep Was on notable show which isn't even over yet. Him "barely" winning is utterly irrelevant. His gym isn't small, it's run by the world's top MMA referee. Could easily make it back on the show which isn't over yet, could easily appear at the finale. Passes WP:ATHLETE. Paralympiakos (talk) 20:57, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 13:22, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Even one pro fight qualifies him under WP:ATHLETE as it currently reads. Having a crappy record isn't a reason to delete. Niteshift36 (talk) 13:50, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:09, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:09, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Subject has only three career fights, all in non-notable, local promotions; therefore, IMO, does not compete on the "fully professional level" of the sport as per WP:ATHLETE. Appeared on a reality TV show and gets eliminated in the first round, also not notable. --TreyGeek (talk) 15:16, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The fact the three fights were PROFESSIONAL fights means that he fits the criteria. Also, he's fought at the highest level of MMA (UFC in the Ultimate Fighter) where he was eliminated in the SECOND round, having already fought to get into the house. He totally meets criteria. Should also be noted that the above vote was as a result of canvassing by User:RapidSpin33 Paralympiakos (talk) 15:33, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:ATHLETE says a person must "have competed at the fully professional level of a sport" (emphasis mine). Three fights in local promotions, IMO, does not qualify as fully professional. If it were, then the yahoo who fights every weekend at the VFW for $50 is also a notable professional MMA fighter. Matches on TUF are exhibition matches and thus, IMO, are not fully professional level matches. Also, I do peek in on Wikipedia on weekends, including the MA deletion sorting list, so I would have seen and commented here anyhow. As for canvassing, RapidSpin was looking for additional people to comment on the nomination, not seeking a particular "vote". --TreyGeek (talk) 18:25, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The fact the three fights were PROFESSIONAL fights means that he fits the criteria. Also, he's fought at the highest level of MMA (UFC in the Ultimate Fighter) where he was eliminated in the SECOND round, having already fought to get into the house. He totally meets criteria. Should also be noted that the above vote was as a result of canvassing by User:RapidSpin33 Paralympiakos (talk) 15:33, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Copied from the AFD for Joe Henle: Surely you of anyone should realise who farcical the "exhibition" tag for TUF actually is. The only reason for it is so they don't have to realise the results. It's still a professional bout, even if it isn't recorded on permanent fight records. Also, with the athlete section, the athlete definition is, as stated, about teh notability of the organisation competed in. UFC/TUF is the top level. Paralympiakos (talk) 18:27, 22 May 2010 (UTC) (As for canvassing, I think it's fairly clear he ONLY asked YOU because he knew what your response would be; that's canvassing).
- No, I asked TreyGeek because he is the only person I know on Wikipedia. RapidSpin33 (talk) 23:09, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Didn't ask me! You know me, but I had to find out about this because you didn't inform me, as you were supposed to in the guidelines for AFDs. You should also know a few of the names that regularly pop up, such as BrendanFrye or Justinsane15. The reason you asked him was because you knew what his response would be, and additionally what mine would be. You knew that if you informed me, I'd vote to keep. Paralympiakos (talk) 11:27, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, I do know you but I didn't ask because I assumed some bot would tell you. I'm still learning about the rules around here man, calm down. Actually, I've never seen those names. RapidSpin33 (talk) 15:06, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Despite how it may seem, I am calm, I just wish you'd read WP:ATHLETE as Paraisy, McKinney, Henle and Lynch all pass it, giving them notability. Instead, I'm having to battle to keep these articles. Paraisy shouldn't have even been deleted. 3 vs. 1 isn't consensus in my book. Paralympiakos (talk) 17:01, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, I do know you but I didn't ask because I assumed some bot would tell you. I'm still learning about the rules around here man, calm down. Actually, I've never seen those names. RapidSpin33 (talk) 15:06, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Didn't ask me! You know me, but I had to find out about this because you didn't inform me, as you were supposed to in the guidelines for AFDs. You should also know a few of the names that regularly pop up, such as BrendanFrye or Justinsane15. The reason you asked him was because you knew what his response would be, and additionally what mine would be. You knew that if you informed me, I'd vote to keep. Paralympiakos (talk) 11:27, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete I don't believe he qualifies under WP:ATH, yet. TUF is not the UFC, they're competing for a UFC contract. This means it's really a tryout. I don't consider an athlete to be "fully professional" unless he can make his living as a competitor--that's why minor league baseball players are not generally considered notable. I'd agree that anyone who gets paid is a professional, but that would include kids who win $50 at a local karate competition. That's why it says "fully professional". Papaursa (talk) 15:11, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- That's where you're wrong. They're all under contract, all 14 of them. However, the ones who don't get past the first round are released. They aren't fighting for a contract, as they're already under contract and the quarter finalists are always invited back and get AT LEAST one fight. They're fighting for a SIX FIGURE contract. Therefore, I'd say your argument was void. Paralympiakos (talk) 15:12, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- See my comments under the Clayton McKinney discussion. I still don't think they meet the definition of "fully professional". I wish we could keep all these arguments in just 1 place. I think MMA could use some notability guidelines to cut down and centralize these discussions. Papaursa (talk) 15:19, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- That's where you're wrong. They're all under contract, all 14 of them. However, the ones who don't get past the first round are released. They aren't fighting for a contract, as they're already under contract and the quarter finalists are always invited back and get AT LEAST one fight. They're fighting for a SIX FIGURE contract. Therefore, I'd say your argument was void. Paralympiakos (talk) 15:12, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I've left a message on Papaursa's talk page. Can we agree to try to discuss on WP:MMA about how to define notability in MMA? I know a lot of discussion there die quickly, but I know that Rapid is a regular editor here and TreyGeek, while not as frequent as before, is also somewhat regular. Any chance people? (Also, until then, can we postpone this deletion and that of McKinney until we can form consensus, because atm, it's pretty much tied on both. Paralympiakos (talk) 15:33, 24 May 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.