- 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. → Call me Hahc21 01:51, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Shannon Ritch (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable MMA fighter Peter Rehse (talk) 15:49, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 15:49, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:05, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:05, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep — The article passes WP:NMMA. He has fought twice for Pride FC and once for World Extreme Cagefighting. Poison Whiskey 16:36, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Do you even look at articles before you nominate them?? It would take me less time to skim through a fight record to find the required top tier fights versus doing everything that is needed to nominate said article for deletion....LOL. • Sepulwiki (talk) 09:00, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep He technically does meet WP:NMMA, even though he lost all 3 of his top tier fights (as well as nearly 80 in total). He's like a journeyman boxer--lots of losses but no notable wins.Mdtemp (talk) 18:57, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Exactly the WP:NMMA are pretty good guidelines but just as some who don't quite make the mark remain notable this I think is the opposite example. Lots of losses in a long career.Peter Rehse (talk) 19:15, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't have strong feeling about this. The article does need better sources.Mdtemp (talk) 19:30, 18 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.