Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reshat Mati

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. Davewild (talk) 21:26, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reshat Mati

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

Non-notable MMA fighter. There is a lot of hyperbole here including some borderline false claims. Does not meet WP:KICK, WP:NMMA or WP:NBOX - far as I can tell all titles are as Junior. One could suggest that references are pretty specific coverage but I think we need more to cover WP:GNG. Peter Rehse (talk) 12:30, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 12:30, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:50, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:50, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Lots of hyperbole, puffery, and misleading info. Winning titles as a pre-teen and teen does not show notability. He has yet to compete at the highest level of any martial art. He may become notable but right now that's WP:CRYSTALBALL. His father is clearly driving him and he may become notable, but it's WP:TOOSOON for an article on him yet. Lots of successful juniors never achieve the same success as an adult.Mdtemp (talk) 18:07, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:07, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Winning a 2 person 14-15 year old WKA division isn't grounds for notability. Youth titles show potential, but potential isn't the same as notable.Astudent0 (talk) 21:56, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There is some coverage of him, but frankly, it's nothing I haven't seen literally thousands of times for child "prodigies" (in many fields). I see no reason to rush an article for someone who may not achieve success as an adult, especially since WP says notability is not temporary. If he has success as an adult the article can be recreated at that time. Papaursa (talk) 02:21, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. Those sources are not reliable sources. Ashbeckjonathan (talk) 01:10, 30 May 2015 (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.