Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ranchero Alonzo


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 20:40, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Ranchero Alonzo

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Non-notable boxer that fails WP:GNG and WP:NBOX. – 2 . O . Boxing  20:02, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  2 . O . Boxing  20:02, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Boxing-related deletion discussions.  2 . O . Boxing  20:02, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  2 . O . Boxing  20:02, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:25, 4 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep; The notability standard for boxers, WP:NBOX, does not match the reality of what is already on Wikipedia. Many lesser-known boxers that are already on Wikipedia do not appear to meet the standard either. Also, Ranchero Alonzo is mentioned in at least two other Wikipedia articles. If someone reading those articles wants to know more about Ranchero, as I did, creating a separate page is the best way of providing that information, since there is no applicable list article. Additional references are available, such as BoxRec and numerous news articles, but I do not want to expand the article further, if it is about to be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OvertAnalyzer (talk • contribs)
 * Additional references are available, such as BoxRec and numerous news articles, but I do not want to expand the article further, if it is about to be deleted...sorry, but that's not how article creation or AFD works. You include references to establish notability before you publish the article, not when the article gets sent to AFD. I recommend you use WP:Articles for creation in the future. If you can't be bothered to add these numerous references (none of which I found in my BEFORE search), then the article will be deleted. And just to clarify, WP:GNG is what you need to satisfy. – 2 . O . Boxing  00:29, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
 * User:Squared.Circle.Boxing; Please excuse me for not being clear. What I meant was, if the article will be deleted, regardless of wether there are additional references or not, then there is no point adding anything to the article. The additional newspaper references I can cite are from Newspapers.com and GenealogyBank.com. Most of the articles are simply reports of fight results, but a few do have some additional details about Ranchero. I have not as yet found any information about him participating in, or winning, any title fights. If that is a requirement, based on WP:NBOX, before he is considered notable, then additional information or citations would not lead anywhere. I respect the fact that you have put in a lot of effort to develop boxing related articles on Wikipedia, and will defer to you on the matter. It was my intent to start a stub article, and possibly build on it, but if you don't think it will ever meet the WP:NBOX standard, then maybe we should just go ahead an delete it now. Thanks. OvertAnalyzer (talk)
 * As far as I understand it, and I know there's a lot of back and forth over this, but NBOX is secondary. Although I wouldn't have nominated it for deletion if the subject met NBOX (I'd presume that there would be coverage out there somewhere that I can't find), if there's a solid case for GNG then that's enough for me. I wouldn't bother arguing the criteria of NBOX and would happily withdraw the nomination. – 2 . O . Boxing  13:54, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep The topic passes WP:BASIC and WP:NBOX. JoyStick101 (talk) 12:24, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
 * fancy seeing you here! Lol! Read NBOX and tell me which aspects the subject satisfies. Please provide sources to establish GNG has been met. Simply saying it doesn't make it so. – 2 . O . Boxing  12:28, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment: The only reference in the article is an obituary. Anybody who says the subject satisfies GNG are required to do a WP:BEFORE search and provide the relevant sources. This shouldn't need to be said, but here we are. – 2 . O . Boxing  12:33, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete As far as I can tell, he fails to meet WP:NBOX or WP:GNG. Certainly an obituary by the funeral home doesn't count.  Nor does it matter who he fought (see WP:NOTINHERITED).  Simply being a pro boxer is not sufficient to show notability.  Meeting WP:NBOX is not required, but showing coverage that meets WP:GNG or WP:NBASIC is.  The burden of proof is on those who claim notability. Papaursa (talk) 03:09, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete, I can't see evidence that he passes WP:NBOX. A funeral home obituary is not enough to show notability and I couldn't find sufficient sources to pass WP:GNG through a WP:BEFORE search. Suonii180 (talk) 13:58, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete No sourcing aside from obituary. Avilich (talk) 16:28, 11 March 2022 (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.