Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mickey Goodwin


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 17:19, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Mickey Goodwin

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Notability not established - does not meet WP:NBOX. Never fought for a major title. Peter Rehse (talk) 15:00, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 15:00, 5 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep -I wasn't even notified of this AfD. The WP:NBOX guideline isn't the only guideline for notability. There are obviously dozens and dozens of articles written about Goodwin. Even after his untimely death. A female fighter he trained won the Women's World Championship in Barbados in 2010. While he was trying out for the 1976 Olympic boxing team, he won his first 2 fights but withdrew because of a severe cut on his eye.Goodwin is definitely notable. Dave Dial (talk) 15:41, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, just to add, this seems like a bad faith nomination. You listed this at the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions? What does Mickey Goodwin have to do with martial arts? Just looking at the sources I provided on the page any editor can see Goodwin passes general notability, without even going to the WP:NBOX. The sources I listed here I didn't even include in the article. Instead of nominating the article for deletion, why don't you try to expand it? The article is obviously not a candidate for AfD. Dave Dial (talk) 07:04, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Adding to the source for the #5 raking in the Middleweight division listed below, here are other sources. June 7, 1981 - Goodwin ranked 6th in WBA Middle weight March 6, 1982 - Goodwin ranked 5th in WBA Middleweight May 17, 1981 - Goodwin ranked 4 Dave Dial (talk) 02:13, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:12, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:12, 6 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Coverage is essentially due to his death. He fails to meet WP:NBOX--he never fought for a major title or was ranked in the top 10.  Training a notable fighter does not make him notable (WP:NOTINHERITED and competing at an Olympic trial also doesn't show notability.  Boxing is probably the original martial art so this is hardly a bad faith nomination.Mdtemp (talk) 19:07, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak keep I'll accept the sources given as showing he was ranked in the top 10 and hence meets WP:NBOX. Otherwise I don't believe notability has been shown.Mdtemp (talk) 18:12, 9 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Coverage is due to his death? There are books and sources from 1975 to 1995, far before 'his death'. The only really his death is covered is because he was a notable person. Which meets WP:GNG. There is no doubt that the article subject meets GNG. Dave Dial (talk) 22:45, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Let me also add, the AfD is incorrect. I never heard of WP:NBOX, but I see it was introduced in 2011 by an ordinary editor. So how is it even a guideline? Was there an RfC? WP:GNG is definitely a guideline. Also, it looks like Goodwin was ranked #5 in the WBA Middleweight division in 1981, and I bet there are many more sources. Editors here are casting delete votes and bringing the article to AfD without even checking the sources. I found the #5 ranking from the search at the top of this page. Definitely a bad faith nomination and delete vote. Dave Dial (talk) 23:07, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
 * The fact that you haven't heard of WP:NSPORTS, which is where NBOX is found, does not mean it has no merit. As far as rankings go I searched those of Ring magazine, which I view as superior to those of the biased, and sometimes corrupt, individual boxing organizations--and I didn't find him.  I've already debunked the previous sources you gave and of the 5 sources in the article--3 were triggered by his death, 1 is an article saying he's been dropped from a local fight card, and one consists of a couple of passing mentions.  None of which show he meets GNG.  If there's been bad faith at this AfD it's been by you.Mdtemp (talk) 18:12, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
 * One, you haven't 'debunked' anything. And you are still getting the facts wrong. NBOX is a made up 'guideline' that only has merit for those that devote their time to AfD of sporting people. It never went through the process to be accepted by the community as a guideline, and in fact was introduced in 2011 without any discussion. The discussion on the Talk page afterwards was by a limited amount of editors with no notice for other editors. So in fact, NBOX might as well not even exist. It doesn't mean anything other than perhaps an essay. Also, Goodwin wasn't 'dropped' from a fight, he pulled out of the Middleweight Title fight because he broke his hand. Common sense should tell anyone that fighting in a Title fight one would be ranked in the top 10. Not to mention the SEVERAL sources I've provided stating for a fact he was ranked in the top 5. So there is no question about it. The reason the sources on the article are mostly concerning his death is because those are the most recent articles and easiest to find. When I saw there was no article on Goodwin, I decided to put one on the project. I'm not an article writer, so did the best I could. But it should be obvious to anyone that even did a half-assed search of Goodwin that he is notable and easily passes WP:GNG. Easily. So I take it the nominated and your delete vote were made without even a half-assed search. So that equals obvious bad fail. Obvious. Dave Dial (talk) 20:15, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
 * You would know half-assed since you obviously didn't read the article which says he was dropped from a "Super Show" fight in Detroit--it's not about his injury that prevented him from fighting Hagler. It also says he's never fought a ranked fighter so I have to wonder about the validity of those high rank claims.  How do you get to be a top 5 fighter without ever fighting another ranked fighter?  That's probably why he wasn't ranked by Ring magazine.Mdtemp (talk) 17:04, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh for fuck sakes, do you even read the articles, or are you purposely misrepresenting what they state? Goodwin was 'dropped' from a January 23rd Detroit 'super show' by his manager(Emanuel Steward) so he could train for the March 6th Hagler fight. And there is no question that Goodwin was ranked high by the WBA. I've provided several sources stating such. No question at all. There is something fishy going on here between you, the nominator of this AfD and some others. If you people want to continue to play the game, don't be surprised by a boomerang. Dave Dial (talk) 22:09, 10 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 08:52, 13 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep per Dave Dial's sources establishing notability. --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:04, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment Obnoxious conspiracy theories aside the found references showing top 10 WBA over several years meets WP:NBOX. It would be great if those references and the BoxRec (http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=18038&cat=boxer) could be incorporated into the article.  It is highly unusual for someone to consistently be in the Top 10 of a major organization and not have a title fight - that may reflect really bad luck or a weakness in the WBA ranking - but in either case it is a good hook for a better article.Peter Rehse (talk) 17:40, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 * He not only didn't have a title fight, he didn't fight another ranked fighter. I agree he meets NBOX, though not strongly.  I've never taken this much abuse after agreeing with someone's vote.Mdtemp (talk) 18:51, 14 October 2014 (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.