Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mixed martial arts/MMA notability/Archive 10

RIZIN
So... is Rizin seriously not listed -at all- under any tier? The debate about revamping notability guidelines has been going on for years. This project is now laughably out of date to the point that wiki is quickly becoming a focus of criticism when it comes to missing fighter pages (see complaints about Mickey Gall, Sage Northcutt, Rin Nakai, etc. or many other fighters who lacked the magic number of fights in the top tier but are still clearly notable for other reasons).

I'd suggest Rizin as tier 1 as it's basically the new Pride and has had several top names fighting for it, but not necessarily ranked fighters. However as MMA:NOT exists now, it'd probably be tier2. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.121.208.39 (talk) 17:12, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Rizin is considered a "Second Tier" promotion. Ppt1973 (talk) 13:22, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
 * No issue if under WP:MMATIER it is entered as second tier.PRehse (talk) 13:29, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Titan
No harm no foul since I think the move was correct and it does not affect notability but I think changes to WP:MMATIER should be discussed first.PRehse (talk) 13:50, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Bellator reversion
I reverted the unilateral decision by Ppt1973 to make Bellator top tier again. Changes should only be made by consensus after discussion. Papaursa (talk) 17:13, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Do we really have to continue this? They just held an incredible PPV event in Madison Square Garden featuring legends like Fedor, Wanderlei and Sonnen. They just signed Gegard Mousassi. They now have Bader, Davis, Minakov, Mousassi, Freire, Lima, MacDonald and Larkin in the Sherdog Top 10's. Those rankings dont even take into account all the other stars on their roster - Liam McGeary literally just fell out, as well as Michael Chandler (thanks to an ankle break). Koreshkov, Mitrione, Page, King Mo, Henderson and many more would also be on the periphery of Sherdog's rankings and/or included in other rankings like MMA Junkie. I find it very strange for us to base top tier status on such a clearly flawed system. At some point common sense must prevail. IIISmokeyIII (talk) 15:24, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
 * It was the "clearly flawed system" where people claimed virtually any professional MMA fighter was notable that led to the consensus of setting objective criteria for MMA organizations and fighters. Having past their prime fighters like "like Fedor, Wanderlei and Sonnen", who can no longer compete in the UFC, doesn't put Bellator in a favorable light.  Sonnen had lost 4 of his last 5 fights before beating Silva (that's 1 win in over 5 years) and Fedor hasn't won a top tier fight since 2011.  That's not to say those fighters aren't notable, but rather that they don't prove Bellator is the highest level of MMA fighting. Papaursa (talk) 03:41, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Bellator MMA - Top Tier
I've seen the most recent discussion for Bellator to be included in the top tier last July. I think Bellator is more of a top tier now than 2-5 years ago. If Invicta is considered top tier, then so should bellator. They probably are the 2nd ranked promotion behind the UFC. They also have more ranked fighters than any other promotion other than the UFC. So it's not just about fighters past their prime, they have multiple ranked fighters now and there are already a lot of UFC fighters considering the move. As per the description "Active organizations with multiple fighters ranked in the top 10 in any of the 9 weight classes were placed in the top tier." they should be qualified.

Ranked fighters seen from diff ranking systems:

Heavyweight

 * Vitaly Minakov
 * Matt Mitrione

Light Heavyweight

 * Ryan Bader
 * Phil Davis

Middleweight

 * Gegard Mousasi

Welterweight

 * Rory MacDonald
 * Douglas Lima

Featherweight

 * Patricio Freire

Bantamweight

 * Aljamain Sterling
 * Darrion Caldwell

Women's Featherweight

 * Julia Budd
 * Arlene Blencowe
 * Talita Nogueira
 * Amanda Bell

Women's Flyweight

 * Ilima-Lei Macfarlane

Tbb 911 (talk) 17:18, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mixed martial arts/MMA notability/Archive 9.PRehse (talk) 17:54, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

The archived discussion mentioned above is the best starting point. Personally I have never been happy with UFC being the only top tier organization for men but Belator really did crash and burn and deserved the demotion. In the discussion the consensus was that Bellator (or any organization) needed 10 fighters in the top 10 for a period of time. I think enough time has passed since the last discussion that we should examine it further. My question is how long has Bellator maintained the 10,10 position and hopefully we will get input from, , who were active in that discussion.PRehse (talk) 18:20, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 * While Bellator technically has 10 fighters in Sherdog's top 10, all it takes is one fighter to lose to make this discussion pointless. Also, in the October 31 edition of the Sherdog rankings, Bellator only had 8 fighters, so we are still in the same position as last time. Petar Ellis (talk) 14:10, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I misread the original post. Sherdog is the site we use to determine how many top 10 fighters a promotion has, which Bellator still doesn't have. Like I said in my last post, we are still in the same position. Petar Ellis (talk) 14:49, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I think it's important to remember that the men's and women's rankings (and tier status) are considered separately. I think Bellator is trying to improve their roster, but I don't think there are yet enough top 10 fighters.  Previous consensus is that organiztions shouldn't be moved around constantly and that for any organization to be considered top tier it has to show that status for awhile. Papaursa (talk) 01:00, 25 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I agree. They haven't reached the amount of top 10 fighters on Sherdog (10) that was agreed upon in the last discussion, let alone maintain that number for a while. Petar Ellis (talk) 10:44, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Bellator MMA No Longer Top Tier?
Bellator being demoted is ridiculous given its current position in the MMA world. Multiple signings of big name fighters but it's not notable past 2015? Not sure when that change happened but it needs to be reviewed. There's a clear UFC bias currently as outside Invicta for women there's only a single notable promotion. That's simply not the case.

UFC Bellator ONE RIZIN Invicta

That should be your top tier. Though it would be worth expanded the 3 fights rule to 5. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.121.209.189 (talk) 15:12, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

To make it very clear MMA:NOT even states " Active organizations with multiple male fighters ranked in the top 10 in any of the 9 weight classes, or at least three female fighters ranked in the top 5 (regardless of weight class), were placed in the top tier."

Ryan Bader Phil Davis Rory MacDonald Gegard Mousasi Julia Budd Arlene Blencowe Talita Nogueira* (ranked 6 but Holly Holm should not be ranked at featherweight if she's going back to 135) Douglas Lima Darrion Caldwell Ilima-Lei Macfarlane are all top 10/top 5 for women

Beyond the fact that the obvious bias towards women needs to change, there is ZERO argument that Bellator is not top-tier from 2015 onwards. They have always had fighters ranked in the top 10, and that's just relying on Sherdog's arbitrary rankings, which are compiled by a handful of writers working for the site. Not to mention it's criminal that Chandler isn't ranked at lightweight currently. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.121.209.189 (talk) 15:22, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Revising notability guidelines
There's been a lot of talk about the MMA notability guidelines at Articles_for_deletion/Kevin_Belingon_(2nd_nomination) with some parties, myself included, concerned that the way we ascertain notability, especially the exclusion of ONE as a venue for notable fighters, is inappropriate. There is concern about effectively out-sourcing our assessment of a fighter's notability to Sherdog. We all agree over there it isn't the right venue for that discussion, so I'm starting one up here. Simonm223 (talk) 16:58, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I am not bonded to the issue and have no strong opinions, but the current notability guidelines seem convoluted and arbitrary to me. Especially the designation of the ONE organization as "second tier". The article, with three references, states that their championship is regarded as, "...the biggest martial arts promotion in the world." How is this second tier? Ifnord (talk) 21:10, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
 * It seems like the reason is because, at some point in the past, we decided that Sherdog was the most reliable source for MMA related content and never revised as the sport expanded. That's why I think we need to consider re-examining this particular guideline; it strikes of a certain level of Western chauvinism (probably not at all deliberate.) Simonm223 (talk) 01:03, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for this tread Sir Simonm, AHA! That's it that's one of the things that i think is influencing the MMA rankings currently, If you are not fighting for the UFC then your most likely wont to "BE" on the MMA rankings being publish by majority of the MMA publishers(PS. NOT ALL). But i do understand that, of course they wont put you on their rankings if they can't watch you fight on there TV screens nor PCs. Which is currently what's happening, if your fighting in the other side of the globe they cant watch you fight live, well at least they can see you on replays on youtube, or maybe they prefer to watch American fighters fighting other fighters around the globe or European fighter fighting other nationality or Asian Vs Asian type of fight, which is kinda true if you think it carefully, its like more of "preference" or loyalty sake or maybe geographic-cultural reasons. Currently I cant see other MMA Fighters being Ranked from the other MMA promotions even if they become champions on a premier promotions not just ONE, but as a whole. Example is like M1 Global signed a deal with UFC, that they will have there fighters fight on UFC then MAGICALLY some of their names and fighters are on the list of MMA rankings. Same thing on Bellator several Bellator Champions are not on the MMA rankings, then he/she fights on the UFC then, boom his name is on the list. Well? Well my point is, with all honesty there is no well known or no independent MMA rankings that rank fighters based on there achievements or promotions nor title. No MMA Publisher or MMA INDEPENDENT Organization recognized or defines who is a Premier MMA promotions and who is NOT. Hopefully next year or 2 or next 5 years their might be independent one or two that starts it. So I think this part of MMA notability can be amended other rules are justifiable.Dragonxtx (talk) 15:22, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I'll be honest; my main concern is that it's gallingly North America-centric to treat fighters who have primarily fought on ONE cards as non-notable when equivalent fighters on a UFC card are considered notable. But beyond that issue, I also have concerns about Wikipedia policy being dependent more on what Sherdog thinks than what WP:SIGCOV would consider appropriate. Simonm223 (talk) 16:05, 29 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment I helped draft these guidelines a decade ago so I thought I'd add some historical perspective. Before the existing guidelines, it was all a matter of personal opinion as to which fighters were notable and which organizations were better.  Pretty much everyone agreed that an objective standard would be better, but of course that led to additional decisions.  There was a strong consensus that, like in most sports, athletes had to be competing at the highest level so we had to determine which organizations qualified for that designation.  Back then there were far more MMA organizations and fighters were scattered among them.  The first decision was to use top 10 (as opposed to 5, 15, 20, etc.) rankings.  Then the debate was which rankings to use.  Sherdog was chosen because they were the primary MMA coverage website and they covered organizations around the world.  Ring magazine served the same purpose for boxers and went back many decades.  Then the number of top 10 fighters in each organization was calculated and that data was used to decide the tier of each organization.  Finally there was the decision that 3 top tier fights was the minimum required to show fighter notability so that one and done fighters (basically on tryouts) would not be included.  The Ultimate Fighter show's bouts were not included because the UFC and Nevada State Athletic Commission considered them exhibitions and they were never included in the fighters' records.  There were, and continue to be, many debates about this methodology but there's never been a consensus to change the basics.  Organizations have been added and removed to the top tier and many organizations have been discussed but the process has stood the test of time.  When women's MMA became more popular we used existing world rankings and kept the same basic methodology, with some tweaks since the depth of women's fighters was less.  A thorough scouring of the archives here and at WT:MMA would reveal thousands of posts on this topic.  In conclusion, the objectivity of the process has proven to be widely approved by MMA editors and remember that WP:GNG always trumps any SNG.  For those of you who object to using Sherdog, then please suggest another source with rankings and the depth of coverage of the existing choice. Papaursa (talk) 22:37, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment My objection to Sherdog is more an objection to any single source being used as the basis for notability criteria. I don't think Wikipedia should operate that way, so using a different single source would hardly improve matters. Beyond that, I think there's some ethnocentrism in counting UFC but not ONE. Perhaps the landscape was different a decade ago, but it's a major fighting organization now. Simonm223 (talk) 12:00, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm reminded of the old saying, "A man with one watch knows what time it is, but a man with two watches is never sure." Having a well considered standard is worthwhile. I'd also like to remind you of WP:NSPORTS, which says that athletes need to have competed at the highest level.  I've not seen convincing evidence that ONE fighters are the highest level.  It's not about whether ONE is a successful promotion, but rather can most of its competitors be considered at the top of their profession. Papaursa (talk) 19:07, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
 * That argument boils down to WP:IDONTLIKEIT - I'd ask what grounds you have for suggesting that ONE is at a lower level than UFC. Simonm223 (talk) 12:16, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Example: Brandon Vera is only One champion with UFC experience. He won only 1 of his last 6 UFC fights and was signed by One where he then won the championship in his second fight with the organization. Papaursa (talk) 00:36, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Not sure how using an objective criteria amounts to IDONTLIKEIT. So you're claiming ONE champions are equivalent to UFC champions--now that seems like WP:ILIKEIT.  Unless, of course, you can show me where ONE fighters have consistently beaten UFC fighters in their prime or can produce some other objective evidence showing the equivalence of the two organization's fighters. Papaursa (talk) 15:58, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * So Wikipedia is a rankings organization? Here I thought it was about notability. ONE gets plenty of press coverage in Asia, which makes it notable. Which makes its fighters notable, regardless of how many or how few people are on both fight cards. I don't think I need to tell you a sample of one fighter is completely meaningless for comparing two organizations. I mean WP:GNG supersedes any of the essay-turned-"policy" type arguments one can make, but this particular policy remains nothing but people trying to preserve the idea that the UFC is the pinnacle of sport fighting. Simonm223 (talk) 13:28, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree that a sample of 1 is too small, although it's one more than you provided for your claim they're equivalent. You seem to be forgetting that the discussion is not about whether One is notable, but rather if it is the highest level of MMA.  If you look at List of Minor League Baseball leagues and teams you'll see lots of leagues listed with articles, but playing in any of them is not a guarantee of notability.  In fact, pretty much every sport recognizes that not all organizations and events are equal and list which ones show notability, so why would MMA be different?  Some examples can be found at WP:NBOXING, WP:NKICK, WP:NHOCKEY, WP:NHOOPS, WP:NBASEBALL, and WP:NFOOTY. Everyone knows WP:GNG trumps WP:SNG, but then you need to show that WP:GNG is met.  Routine sports reporting (like announcements, fight coverage, and results) doesn't do it.  Papaursa (talk) 15:21, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
 * This is very simple. Consider what the purpose of Wikipedia is. MMA fighter entries on this site are not something for hardcore MMA fans to lord over. "Oh he didn't fight in the promotion I like so he's not notable." Rather, ask whether a fighter has fought, repeatedly, in a promotion with a wide ranging fanbase/viewership. ONE Championship has TV deals all over the world. They air live in multiple countries and sell out arenas. People watching may want to look up the fighters they're seeing, but they can't because a couple of admins on Wikipedia don't think they fought in the right promotion? Seriously, fix this already. MMA on Wiki has become a joke. And if you don't think fighters in ONE could do well against their UFC counterparts in the same weight class, you haven't been paying attention. The reality is the fight game is not baseball, or football, where all the best head to North America eventually. The fact that Bellator is also not top tier at the moment despite having multiple top ten fighters is making MMA:NOT look bad as well, since apparently it can't even follow its own rules.

Proposal: Revised Notability Guidelines
Plenty of talk, zero action. Something has to give, as MMA:NOT has basically become a subject of ridicule. The fact is, the greater MMA community still looks at fighters not having a wikipedia entry as a comment on their success. Promotions also factor it in when handing out contracts (there is plenty of anecdotal evidence from fighters to that end). That means these guidelines need to be up to date, and not relying on WP:ILIKEIT or WP:IDONTLIKEIT criteria.

So, proposal time:

First tier organizations are dated. See the post below about Bellator, in regards to MMA:NOT not even following its own guidelines, given Bellator has multiple top ten fighters in several weight classes. Second, basing MMA:NOT on Sherdog's rankings is folly. Sherdog rankings are done by Sherdog. Their writers. There's no overall pool of experts creating that list. It's basically an opinion piece.

Hence forth, I'd suggest basing what makes an organization a tier 1 promotion on the reach of that organization (international TV deals, press coverage, shows outside a small territory). The lone exception to this rule, as it stands, would be Invicta. Invicta's inclusion is based on the merit of it still having a large chunk of active female fighters.

ONE Championship has acquired Demetrious Johnson, Eddie Alvarez, and has home grown stars like Angela Lee, Bibiano Fernades, and Aung La N Sang. RIZIN has almost the entire men's strawweight division if you go by Fight Matrix, and enough notable fighters outside that. Bellator is the clear #2 to the UFC. All of these promotions have competed for free agent talent over the past 18 months.

Ergo: UFC, Invicta, Bellator, RIZIN, and ONE Championship should qualify as tier 1 promotions.

For the time being, I am proposing the PFL be considered as tier 2. That could be reviewed in the league's second season.

However: rather than 3 fights, to be notable, a fighter must compete 5 times for a tier 1 promotion (or promotions). This eliminates your 0-2 fighters who go back to the regional scene never to be heard from again. By your fifth fight many athletes are on their second contract, i.e. good enough to have stuck around.

TL:DR

- tier 1 becomes UFC, Bellator, ONE, RIZIN, Invicta. PFL is tier 2 5 fights in tier 1 required to meet notability guidelines

yay or nay. This should be updated in the near future, this conversation has gone on for well over a year now.
 * Support the general notability guidelines says "verifiable, objective evidence that the subject has received significant attention from independent sources," some of the fighters in the said "tier 2" organizations have more than enough coverage than a lot of the fighters in the UFC today. You wouldn't say a Jenel Lausa, a Yao Zhikui or a Freddy Serrano, is more notable than Bibiano Fernandes, Angela Lee or Kevin Belingon just because they had 3-4 UFC fights even if they lost 3. The guideline is definitely obsolete, if the UFC is to be considered as the only tier 1 org, then we should change from 3 fights to 3 wins and probably 10 fights in tier 2 would be enough as notable.Tbb 911 (talk) 18:46, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
 * If you can show that those fighters meet WP:GNG then there's no need to change WP:NMMA. Saying victories in lower level promotions should be enough is equivalent to saying minor league pitchers should be automatically notable if they win enough lower tier games--even if they don't ever make it to the big leagues. Papaursa (talk) 18:31, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Going back to the original proposal, the biggest flaw of MMA:NOT currently is trying to claim Bellator and other organizations are "minor." Beyond that, comparing MMA to a league format with multiple teams and owners is a flawed analogy period. MMA is prize fighting, and as such, top talent will go where the money is, which is why trying to claim the UFC is the only current tier1 promotion doesn't work. Needing to use WP:GNG as an excuse to get fighters like Ed Ruth and Aaron Pico and Ilima-Lei Macfarlane (she doesn't have 3 fights prior to 2016) in is a haphazard way of handling the issue. The bottom line is that under MMA:NOT's own criteria, Bellator is a tier 1 organization since they have multiple top ten fighters in multiple divisions. They have been for some time, and should never have been dropped from tier1. The rest is voting on the remainder of the promotions. Which, in terms of prize fighting, are absolutely notable. Five fights also eliminates what the previous poster was getting at (or three wins as they suggested, rather than fights). An 0-3 UFC fighter is not notable, they have over 500 fighters on their roster. An 11-0 Bellator fighter [A.J. McKee]] absolutely is. McKee had enough fights prior to the point Bellator was demoted to qualify for a wikipedia entry, but had he started his career a year later, MMA:NOT would not see him as notable. That's indefensible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.121.209.189 (talk) 23:34, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Bellator as a top tier org
Hello,

Currently Bellator is listed as a "top tier" organization, but with "(through 2015)" as a qualifier. I think Bellator should be a top tier org since all of it's champions are ranked in the top ten in the world (in their respective weights) and it's clearly a step above any of the other second tier orgs (even One FC doesn't come close in terms of quality fighters). Notify: User:CASSIOPEIA, User:Papaursa

Cheers, Pokerplayer513 (talk) 02:43, 14 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Please see some of discussions on this topics and some of these could be found on other threads as well - . You could find other discussion on other archive as well. 10:43, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you User:CASSIOPEIA! It seems to me that based on that discussion, Bellator should be a top tier org no? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pokerplayer513 (talk • contribs) 03:03, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
 * The last discussion which the WikiProject MMA community agreed upon, pls right me if my memories are not correct, is that "an MMA organization to be considered top tier, it must have at least 3 fighters ranked in the top 10 for one continuous year. If there's a time during that year when it doesn't have 3 top 10 fighters, the clock is automatically reset to zero and top 10 is a fairly common sports criteria. For example, it's used for both the boxing and kickboxing notability criteria." If and when Bellator or any mma promoters/org meet the criteria then they will promote to tier one promoter.
 * Please note, there are some fighters who are more skills and higher ranked than UFC's fighters but since they are not fought under UFC banner, they are considered not notable, unfortunately. UFC would sign some local fighters if events are held in the countries. There are many things to consider for UFC to organize an event outside US, such as support of local authorities and mma organisations, local marketing efforts, support of local fans of ticket selling, event time in local countries which matches US prime time for viewership and PPV ticket selling, local logistic, suitable venue, media coverage and etc. For example, a PPV event in Russia or Croatia would be hard to organize as US60 for a PPV is too expensive to local fans and the event need to set in the early morning in local times to suite the US audience. There are a few fighters from my home countries who skills are not comparable to the top fighters that of KWS, M1, ACB or BAMMA's, but they got signed to feature in the event, sad to say,  as UFC loves and have organised  PPV events in my home country as the gate tickets got sold out in less than 10 mins, PPV was extremely high, fight night/day time is favorable/compatible to US TV prime time among other things. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 08:06, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Ryan Bader is #10 HW and #5 LHW according to Sherdog and champion (or tournament winner) since January 2019 and June 2017 respectively. Gegard Mousasi is #6 at MW and champ since May 2018 and he defeated (#7 current WW champ) Rory MacDonald in September 2018. MacDonald has been WW champ since January 2018. At bantamweight there's Darrion Caldwell at #9 and he's been champ since 2017. Women's featherweight Julia Budd is #3 and champ since 2017. Women's flyweight Ilima-Lei Macfarlane is #2 and champ since 2017. According to those numbers, Bellator has five current champions (not including other fighters) who are ranked in the top 10 of their weight class according to sherdog and have been champions for over 1 year. Does that make them a top tier org? Thanks again for your help! Pokerplayer513 (talk) 03:40, 16 March 2019 (UTC)


 * The most recent general discussion I can find on organizational notability is from January 2016. Using these numbers the ensuing discussion decided to make the UFC the only top tier men's organization and the UFC and Invicta both top tier for women.

"Using the proposal above for organizational notability, I thought I'd see what the counts were for the various organizations. For the men I used Sherdog's top 10 (8 divisions) and for the women I used the top 5 in the Unified Women's rankings (5 divisions). The difference, which is the same methodology as was used previously, was because of the greater depth in men's fighting. As was done previously, the organization used is based on who promoted a fighter's last fight. Here are the results:

Men: UFC 71, Bellator 4, WSOF 2, OneFC 1, KSW 1, EFN 1 Women: UFC 10, Invicta 8, Bellator 3, XFC 2, Deep Jewels 2 Women (using top 10): UFC 17, Invicta 17, Bellator 4, Deep Jewels 4, XFC 3, others 5".

I say general discussion because more recent ones have dealt with "requests" to make some particular organization top-tier (various ones have been proposed). The most recently accepted proposal on notability that I'm aware of changed the number of top 10 fighters required to show an organization is top tier from 3 to 6. Meeting this criteria doesn't automatically make an organization top tier, it still needs to be discussed. However, it is considered a minimum requirement. Papaursa (talk) 00:14, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I should also remind everyone that top tier status is determined separately for men and women. The counts are not combined. Papaursa (talk) 01:02, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Craig Jones - notable?
Hi, please could someone comment on the notability of this fighter? Draft:Craig Jones (Martial Artist) Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 17:45, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Another notability topic for discussion, if not a proposal
I was thinking that a better standard would be two wins in a top tier organization instead of 3 fights. Sandals1 (talk) 19:14, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I think your proposal is a better criteria, but I would oppose it if it were a proposal. That's because it wouldn't produce different decisions for most fighters, although it would be a bit more limiting, and implementing/checking it on all those fighters who currently have pages would be more bureaucratic that it's worth. Papaursa (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Proposal A--fighter notability based on rankings
Any fighter, male or female, that is ranked in the world top 10 by Sherdog should be considered notable. Sandals1 (talk) 19:07, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Guess I didn't make it clear this would be an additional way for MMA fighters to be notable.Sandals1 (talk) 17:26, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Support

 * Support. Using the world top 10 to show notability is similar to the standards used by boxing and kickboxing. It is also reasonable that such a fighter would have enough coverage to meet the GNG and makes the organizational debate less important.Sandals1 (talk) 19:07, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Support This seems like a common sense addition to the MMA fighter notability criteria. It's actually better than what we're currently using as it pinpoints the specific fighters that are at the top of their game.  If this was the only criteria used it would be too limiting for the WP MMA community, but as an addition I can't see why anyone would object.  I believe it would need to be proposed and discussed at WT:NSPORT to be officially added to WP:NMMA, but I don't know why people would object when boxers and kickboxers have similar criteria and MMA is far more popular--but I've been wrong before. Papaursa (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Discussions

 * are we talking about changing the notability guidlines for mma fighter here so ONLY applicable the top 10 fighter in any division in Sherdog? Which means hundred of UFC fighter would not be included in the future that would limited mma fighters page which is not advisable. If we look at WP:NBOX, which is inline with MMA, it based on promotion and there a a few of them. As we here just on one promotion, UFC. The thing is that, many UFC fighters in term of ranking, ranked lower than many  Bellator fighters, yet because they are not considered fighting for top tier promotion (UFC) then they do not pass the mma notability guidelines to have a page in Wikipedia. Mo rover, if you look the the last 2 years all division top 10 ranking in Sherdog, only 1 fighter, Jessy Miele, in top 10 does not have a page. Thus this made no different on what the current notability guidelines and what is proposed as the top 10 in all divisions are either UFC fighters or Bellator fighters and majority of the Bellator fighters in in top 10 are previously fought under UFC. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 01:02, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I took the proposal to mean that this criteria would be in addition to what currently exists. If it was meant to replace those, then I would oppose it.  Notice that in my endorsement I assumed it was "a common sense addition". Papaursa (talk) 03:07, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I did find a ranked fighter from One FC and I have seen ranked Bellator fighters that didn't meet the existing standard, so this could add a few fighters.Sandals1 (talk) 17:26, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Proposal B--update number of fighters needed to be top tier
The minimum number of top 10 ranked fighters required for an organization to be considered top tier should be 6.

Support

 * Support. I looked it up and this was the original number. It was later changed to 3 and then increased to 6 in a January 2016 discussion (but never updated on WP:MMANOT). The number 3 was chosen when there were fewer divisions and more active top tier organizations.  The basic notability standard at WP:NSPORT says an individual needs to have participated "at the highest level".  With 8 men's divisions, I don't see how an organization can be considered "at the highest level" and not have a single ranked fighter in most of the divisions.Sandals1 (talk) 19:47, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Support The original decision to set it at 3 was because there were so many organizations and WP MMA editors wanted more fighters to be notable, but with an objective criteria to reduce arguments. There were also fewer divisions for both men and women.  The original men's count showed the UFC clearly on top with 31 ranked fighters.  Now it has 73 ranked male fighters.  That's over 90% of all ranked male fighters.  It's hard to make a case that anyone else is close.  I agree with looking at the WP:NSPORT general criteria and that an organization doesn't seem to be at the highest level if most of its division don't have any ranked fighters.  Of course, a promotion could get 6 ranked fighters in one division and still pass this criteria, but I don't want to legislate everything.  Using Proposal A would help ensure that top fighters are recognized as WP notable regardless of their organization.  Yes, ratings are subjective but they're the best thing we have for dealing with this. Papaursa (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Oppose

 * Oppose- * May I have the link of last discussion of the consensus agreement of 6 fighter in top 10 instead of 3? Secondly,if there is a consensus and whoever agreed on it did not bother to update it on MMA notability is a little irresponsible as we notability guidelines is important of what we allow which fighter to include in Wikipedia page. Lastly, if i know (and confirmed by link as request above it would take 6 fighters instead of 3 fighters, I would not be proposed this at all, as it takes me 3 days to gather all and provide all the evident info and make the Ballator passes the guidelines for the last 2 years which I waited since I started editing for more than 2.5 years before I set out to proposal it. If 6 fighters is acceptable, we are talking killing all other organisations to be included in Wikipedia mainspace beside UFC and that is a very dreadful monopoly decision, which we will only see UFC fighters in Wikipedia for the next 10 years or more. . CASSIOPEIA(talk) 01:02, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I answered this above. Papaursa (talk) 03:07, 20 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose- At this point rankings are unreliable and should be used as a guide only. If the proposal is to rely on Sherdog still (a single website with a single writer attributed to each ranking update) then this feels overly restrictive and far too open to bias.JiminyFixit (talk) 17:31, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Discussions
I think using the Sherdog rankings is not necessarily the best way to go about these things, as they are created by a source that certainly does not hold the same sway in the industry as it used to with many of the more respected members of the organization having moved on.

Surely, abetter way to go about things would be to follow the general Wikipedia notability guidelines so the criteria should be that "significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject."

This would also future-proof the community, for example, if some Polish guy wins a KSW title and becomes a superstar in Poland, but does not break into any rankings due to lack of top competition. If the guy is generating headlines across reputable media sources in his part of the world, and as a consequence, he is covered around the world (particularly on well-known MMA sites, he should meet notability guidelines.

The same should apply to an athlete in Bellator, PFL champions who have won $1m and gained exposure on national broadcast/regional media/global MMA media, or a Southeast Asian athlete who has garnered a huge following due to doing well in ONE.

This way, notability is dictated in a more democratic way through actual, tangible notability – the fact that enough publications have taken an interest to give coverage to these people beyond just listing the results of their fights — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theresmolimit (talk • contribs) 15:08, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * You're a pretty new user, so it should be pointed out to you that anyone meeting WP:GNG by consensus will be considered notable on WP. The GNG trumps all SNG, which is what WP:NMMA is.  It's also worth pointing out that routine sports coverage is not considered coverage that meets WP:GNG.  This discussion is not about ignoring WP:GNG, but rather about determining a sport specific criteria that the WP community would agree to use as a shortcut for confirming WP:GNG is met.  The various SNG are generally used to make things easier and have the additional effect of generally increasing the number of people that become WP notable. Papaursa (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Whether he's a new user or not (not relevant), he brings up a good point. Numerous notable fighters have seen pages deleted citing WP:MMANOT guidelines. Rin Nakai comes to mind, as she didn't meet the three-fight criteria IIRC. Despite being a notable figure in Japan, and getting a fair amount of mainstream coverage when she signed with the UFC. Not to mention coverage of her Pancrase fights, where she was champ, but had a few fights play out under "special" rules. All this would lend itself to being deserving of a wiki entry, yet here we are. While I'm not in favor of entirely relying on GNG it would be a good idea to ensure the WPNOT is not overly restrictive, which is the problem now. Better verbiage might help this.JiminyFixit (talk) 17:46, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Being a new editor, like yourself (who has mainly edited this page), is important not because it implies a lack of subject matter knowledge but because it takes time to understand the WP culture and policies. Some thought and deference should be given before overturning existing policies.  Your bringing up fighters who have had success in minor organizations is like bringing up minor league all-stars who never made it to the majors.  WP:NSPORT specifically talks about competing at the highest level.  Also remember that if it can be shown that someone meets WP:GNG than meeting the SNG is irrelevant. Papaursa (talk) 03:49, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Proposal: promote Bellator MMA as the top tier promoter for male and female categories
It has been raised many times in recent years to raise Bellator MMA as the tier one promotion. As per MMA guidelines in Wikipedia, an MMA organization to be considered top tier, it must have at least 3 fighters ranked in the top 10 for one continuous year. If there's a time during that year when it doesn't have 3 top 10 fighters, the clock is automatically reset to zero. Below are the month by month Sherdog's rankings for both male and female fighters for 2018 and 2019. (Note: Cris Cyborg, Cat Zingano and Liz Carmouche are not in the list as their Bellator debut will be in first quarter of 2020 which undoubtedly their will be ranked in female top 10 in their respectively divisions in Sherdog's ranking system once the have fought their first fights in Bellator).

Any editor is welcome to vote and discuss on these proposal, pinging those regular MMA editors here which I can remember on top of my head if they wish to make any comments. The proposal will be opened for one month as per to-date and I will invite a non-involved admin to close the proposal.

 2018 and 2019 Sherdog rankings for male fighters 

 2018 and 2019 Sherdog rankings for female fighters 

Proposal 1:
Male category - promote Bellator to be the top tier promotion for such the fighters who have fought under Bellator from 2009 through 2015 and from 2018 to present would be notable under WP:MMABIO guidelines.

Support

 * Support. As the nominator. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 19:16, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Oppose

 * Oppose Based on the information I describe below and Cassiopeia's research it doesn't seem like Bellator currently meets the conditions. I also think that the numbers make it hard to claim that any organization but the UFC is at the highest level for men. Sandals1 (talk) 18:53, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * As per "current" Wikipedia WP:MMA guidelines in Wikipedia, an MMA organization to be considered top tier, it must have at least 3 fighters ranked in the top 10 for one continuous year.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:80%;color:#FA0"> CASSIOPEIA</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 04:12, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Discussions

 * If Bellator has 6 fighters ranked in the top 10 at the end of 2020 I would support making it top tier then.Sandals1 (talk) 18:58, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I disagree with making notability retroactive. Previous discussions, and not just in MMA, have discussed this.  In MMA's case, some admins said that fights for an organization during the time an organization was not top tier should not count towards the requirement.  I think that's reasonable.Sandals1 (talk) 19:12, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * "As per "current"  Wikipedia WP:MMA guidelines in Wikipedia, an MMA organization to be considered top tier, it must have at least 3 fighters ranked in the top 10 for one continuous year. If there's a time during that year when it doesn't have 3 top 10 fighters, the clock is automatically reset to zero." So retroactive is the way to determine if the Bellotr achieve top tier of that particular year.


 * There's truth in both your viewpoints--and I would like to thank both of you for going to the trouble of actually collecting data instead of opinions. The last discussion about the minimum required number of ranked fighters was at WT:MMA and was closed at 6.  However, for some reason, nobody (myself included) bothered to update the criteria here at WP:MMANOT.  The best reason I can give for this is that everyone thought someone else would do it and we were all tired of the protacted fighting that had been going on.  Perhaps it would be best to see what happens to Proposal B first. Papaursa (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2020 (UTC)


 * May I have the link of last discussion of the consensus agreement of 6 fighter in top 10 instead of 3? Secondly, if there is a consensus and whoever agreed on it did not bother to update it on MMA notability is a little irresponsible as it is important for we use the guidelines to determine which fighters are allowed to be included in Wikipedia. Lastly, if I have known (and confirmed by link as request above it would take 6 fighters instead of 3 fighters), then I would have not proposed this at all, as I waited for 2.5 years to make sure Bellator meets the guidelines and  it took me 3 days to gather all and provide all the evident before I set out to propose it. If 6 fighters is acceptable, we are talking of killing all other organisations to be included in Wikipedia mainspace beside UFC and that is a very dreadful monopoly decision, and we will only see UFC fighters in Wikipedia for the next 10 years or more.
 * If you look in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mixed martial arts/Archive 11 you'll see a lot of discussions about organizational notability. Those were the times when arguments were bitter and ongoing.  It was a time filled with sockpuppets, meatpuppets, and angry editors.  The atmosphere drove many editors away.  I am actually glad the topic has been brought up again and is, at least currently, a civil discussion.  I must share at least some of the blame for not updating WP:MMANOT but it hasn't seemed to have made much of a difference until now.  Bellator is on the verge of meeting that criteria, but when you look at the numbers the top fighters are predominantly UFC--and Proposal A would include all top 10 fighters regardless of organization.  For females, using the numbers from Sandals1, it looks like we'd have 3 top tier organizations (UFC, Invicta, and Bellator) if the January numbers can be sustained for the year.  For males, it seems that if Bellator can have 6 at the end of the year it would also meet that criteria. Papaursa (talk) 03:07, 20 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Based on the work of both Cassiopeia and Sandals1, I would be willing to support this proposal if Bellator can keep 6 ranked fighters throughout this year. Papaursa (talk) 03:20, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

-

Proposal 2:
Female category - promote Bellator to be the top tier promotion for such the fighters who have fought under Bellator from 2009 through 2015 and from 2018 to present would be notable under WP:MMABIO guidelines.

Support

 * Support. As the nominator.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:80%;color:#FA0"> CASSIOPEIA</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 19:16, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. They meet the existing criteriaJiminyFixit (talk) 18:01, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Discussions
I disagree with making notability retroactive. Previous discussions, and not just in MMA, have discussed this. In MMA's case, some admins said that fights for an organization during the time an organization was not top tier should not count towards the requirement. I think that's reasonable.Sandals1 (talk) 19:11, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * "As per "current"  Wikipedia WP:MMA guidelines in Wikipedia, an MMA organization to be considered top tier, it must have at least 3 fighters ranked in the top 10 for one continuous year. If there's a time during that year when it doesn't have 3 top 10 fighters, the clock is automatically reset to zero." So retroactive is the way to determine if the Bellotr achieve top tier of that particular year.


 * Rather than repost, just read what I wrote for the previous proposal.Papaursa (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Based on the work of both Cassiopeia and Sandals1, I would be willing to support this proposal if Bellator can keep 6 ranked fighters throughout this year. Papaursa (talk) 03:20, 19 February 2020 (UTC)