Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Corey Lautischer


 * 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. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 00:13, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Corey Lautischer

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable MMA fighter. Article relies primarily on a blog for sources. Only three fights, all of them on undercards. No major bouts. Not enough third-arty recogniyion. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 05:41, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:00, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:00, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * If he's truly a professional MMA fighter, then he's considered notable under wp:ATHLETE. Buddy431 (talk) 01:39, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It's hard to tell for certain, but it appears that he has just three fights, all undercards on local programs. As a sportswriter with a passing familiarity with the sport, I would have a very, very hard time believing that he is fully professional — that MMA is his primary means of making a living. If someone can independently verify otherwise, then I would be inclined to agree. Let's just say for now that I am highly skeptical. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 01:52, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:ATH since that says "fully professional". To me that means someone is making a living just competing in that sport.  Three undercard fights in minor events doesn't meet that condition. Papaursa (talk) 05:12, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Three matches in local, non-notable promotions against non-notable fighters. Nothing to suggest notability.  --TreyGeek (talk) 13:23, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: Three fights does not a professional make. I should have read the article closer. Buddy431 (talk) 17:38, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 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.