Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nino Valdez

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 Keep. (non-admin closure) czar ♔ 22:16, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nino Valdez

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

Non-notable boxer Peter Rehse (talk) 23:15, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 23:15, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cuba-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:44, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:44, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Clearly was ranked in the top 10 so he meets WP:NBOX. I've added a source for his rankings in the article.Mdtemp (talk) 20:16, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He meets WP:NBOX. Ring Magazine also ranked him among the top 10 heavyweights of the 1950s. Papaursa (talk) 20:23, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
~~Tentative delete~~ Keep (see comment below) - WP:NBOX doesn't say "if a magazine says a boxer is in the top 10 he/she is notable." It says Have fought for a national (or higher) professional title for [one of several organizations] or have been ranked in the top-ten of any weight class for either the; IBF, WBA, WBC, or WBO. Did he do either of those? Furthermore the one source added is to a wiki, and therefore not a reliable source. --— Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:41, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I found the Ring magazine rankings repeated on multiple sites. I trust the Ring magazine rankings more than the frequently corrupted rankings of some of the boxing organizations.Mdtemp (talk) 16:27, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A better source than a wiki would be good, but regardless of how corrupted the others are, there's nothing about Ring magazine in WP:NBOX. --— Rhododendrites ^talk | 17:44, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are technically correct, but I don't know of any source that carries more weight concerning boxing than Ring magazine. Ring magazine was listed in the previous criteria and I would claim it's omission is more oversight than substance.Mdtemp (talk) 19:52, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A reason you see them in other articles is that RING was part of the old WP:NBOX. RonSigPi (talk) 23:56, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Upon further research this is an easy keep. It took some digging because the sources are older, which is why I -- and the nominator, probably -- didn't see anything at first. It also appears that "Niño_Valdés" is his real name. There are 11 Sports Illustrated articles, some useful information on the German Wikipedia's article on him, some relatively impressive stats, he's on the cover of Boxing and Wrestling magazine, and plenty more. --— Rhododendrites ^talk | 20:15, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep with the caliber of opposition he faced, such as Archie Moore (twice), Sonny Liston, and Ezzard Charles I think there is little doubt WP:GNG is met. As a reminder, the boxing guidelines are only for presuming notability, the actual test is always if GNG is met. RonSigPi (talk) 00:01, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Clearly has encyclopedic relevance and WP:N is satisfied by either passing WP:GNG or WP:NBOX, and he passes both. --Michig (talk) 16:11, 5 March 2014 (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.