Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe Silva


 * 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. Shi meru  00:14, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Joe Silva

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

This is an unreferenced BLP about someone who works for the UFC. When I went to the UFC web page and searched for his name, I got 0 hits (making me wonder how crucial he is to the UFC). The article fails to show notability and has been tagged for a lack of references for over a year. He's listed as a martial artist, but he fails WP:MANOTE. If this article can be sourced and rewritten to show notability (instead of being an ad), I'd be happy to see it kept. Papaursa (talk) 21:05, 5 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions.  —Papaursa (talk) 21:05, 5 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep & I'll improve once the AFD is completed - Silva is vital to UFC. He books every single match-up. However, the article is shocking at the moment. Stub status however, is not a reason for deletion here. Paralympiakos (talk) 21:42, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It's money-where-the-mouth-is time now, not later. Vague handwaving that you might do something unspecified at some unspecified point in the future isn't good enough.  Where are the sources that you could work from to write an article on this?  Lack of sources very much is a reason for deletion, and has been per Deletion policy pretty much all along.  Our content policies apply strictly in the cases of biographies.  Cite sources now.  Uncle G (talk) 00:11, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Why would someone do that in the middle of an AFD? It's just prone to deletion even so, thus ramping up deleted edits. Pointless. Paralympiakos (talk) 10:23, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Because it's the way to make a keep argument that actually holds water, which your vague handwaving does not. I repeat: cite sources now.  They are your only argument.  Uncle G (talk) 11:50, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per Papaursa's research. Sorry, Paralympiakos, but UncleG is right. Reyk  YO!  12:46, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * One doesn't even need to add the references to the article, presenting them here in the AFD would be sufficient to allow editors to review and decide on notability. Of course, adding them to the article would be best. -- Whpq (talk) 19:33, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. I presume that's all fine now. Paralympiakos (talk) 23:56, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Is this the same guy mentioned in all the Google news results for "Joe Silva" AND "Wrestling"? Decades ago, did he get news coverage for winning wrestling matches in the 110 pound category? If its him getting coverage, then that counts as notable.   D r e a m Focus  15:31, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - non-notable, unreferenced BLP. Fails WP:GNG and WP:MANOTE.  At best, a mention in UFC or another appropriate article would suffice.   Snotty Wong   comment 15:56, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete No references and no notability shown. 131.118.229.82 (talk) 16:55, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete -, , , , and all mention him to varying degrees as the UFC matchmaker.  but aside from that, I can find no toher information being written about him.  If there were some profile write up in a martial arts magazine or something along those lines, then this would tip over to a keep. -- Whpq (talk) 19:31, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep He is UFC's matchmaker. A Google search for "Joe Silva" and UFC comes up with 198,000 results.  Most of the hits are MMA related news sites that reference him being the UFC matchmaker/booker.  However, looking through the results, there seems to be very little information about Silva himself.  I think he is notable, but the problem may be writing a decent article about him.  --TreyGeek (talk) 02:03, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Not seeing the notability. When an article and its sources talk about lacking background info on its subject, it's hard to claim the guy is notable. Astudent0 (talk) 18:19, 7 July 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.