Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Boxing

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Boxing. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Boxing|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Boxing. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Sports.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch


Boxing

[edit]

Articles for deletion

[edit]

Manuel Gomes (boxer)

[edit]
Manuel Gomes (boxer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Declined prod. Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT and WP:NOLY. Eliminated in first round. LibStar (talk) 01:28, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Omar Dabaj

[edit]
Omar Dabaj (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Declined prod. Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT and WP:NOLY. Eliminated in first bout. LibStar (talk) 23:25, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. An editor from Mars (talk) 06:32, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep. The Internet Archive's limited collection of Jordan newspapers brings up 89 mentions of him such as this. The mentions include a 300-word story jointly-focused on him and one other, as well as many brief things such as 1 2 3 4 (he was apparently banned from competition for two years due to his "actions" at the Arab Championships, which I haven't found yet) 5 (national champion) 6 (decent-sized story titled, "Will Omar Dabej win against Tunisian Raouf Harbi", but the translation is poor) 7 (in-depth story on the Olympic team competitors) and many others. One could certainly write a quality, WP:NBASIC-compliant article here. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:37, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aboubacar Diallo

[edit]
Aboubacar Diallo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject fails to meet the WP:GNG because of a lack of WP:SIGCOV. The only reference is a database and all I could find elsewhere were hits on unrelated people with the same name. A redirect to Guinea at the 1996 Summer Olympics#Boxing may be a suitable WP:ATD, although it may cause some confusion with people searching for [[1]] among others. Let'srun (talk) 01:40, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jorge Mejía

[edit]
Jorge Mejía (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Declined prod. The added source is 2 lines of mention and not SIGCOV to meet WP:SPORTSCRIT. LibStar (talk) 03:18, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Khalid Al-Karkhi

[edit]
Khalid Al-Karkhi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No SIGCOV found. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 20:40, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Boxing, Olympics, and Iraq. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 20:40, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Similar to WP:Articles for deletion/David Gillow, one of the cited sources seems to be a picture of a newspaper, but from a Facebook page. We have yet to exactly decipher where the newspaper came from. Until then, per WP:V, I can't count it since we don't know what newspaper this is about. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 21:10, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Incredibly obvious notability. We have SIGCOV here, a picture of an old newspaper story included in a post by the national Olympic academy (the Olympic academy's text indicates notability as well, e.g. "famous in the world of boxing / He fulfilled the dreams of the leaders of the Iraqi sports movement / he has been dubbed the "Golden Champion" for winning the only gold medal in boxing at the Arab Tournament, in which all Arab countries participated / When he retired from boxing, he never strayed far from the boxing atmosphere, remaining attached to its champions, especially those within the army national team, where he became the team's president for many years / to date, no boxer has occupied his position in his weight class / his name flies high among the flags of immortal champions."). There's a big difference here from Gillow, as we can actually read the full text and know it to be SIGCOV. Among other things, it notes he never lost at the national championships and was a well-known national figure nicknamed the "Golden Champion". Other modern sources such as this name him as one of the "sports stars" of his era. The odds of a nationally-known figure and famed "champion" of Iraqi sports remembered decades after his career – someone we've already demonstrated to have one piece of SIGCOV – not having any further coverage during his career (we have not checked any Iraqi archives) is 0%. BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:21, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It’s still not technically an independent source unless we find that newspaper directly and cite it directly. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 01:01, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    A newspaper doesn't become non-independent if its republished by an Olympic committee. WP:NEXIST. And do you seriously think there would be no further coverage in Iraq of their famous "Golden Champion" who never lost a fight in the country, won every national championship he competed for, and is remembered today as an "immortal champion" who "fulfilled the dreams of the leaders of Iraqi sports"? That would be a ludicrous assumption! Its obvious he's notable. BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:07, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    no direct source of the paper itself, no NEXIST. If you can’t find the actual paper, you can’t cite it. That’s bordering on Original research. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 02:07, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    No, that's not how it works. If we have evidence that sources exist, and here it is incredibly strong evidence, then that is sufficient to keep. I don't see how information from a newspaper is possibly "original research" at all. Do you have reason to assume the Olympic organization would fabricate newspaper stories on him? BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:16, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I have reason to believe that the Olympic org as a non-indepnedent source would overblow the amount of coverage. Where is the actual direct citation of that specific newspaper? All I am asking for. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 12:47, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per BeanieFan11. Nixleovel (He/They) (Talk • Contribs) 05:02, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – Per BeanieFan11. Svartner (talk) 12:22, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Per @BeanieFan11. Also is there some sort of contest going on to see who can AFD nominate the most sportspeople because there seems to be a lot of late and many have quickly been proven to be ludicrous nominations the subjects of which have had loads of SIGCOV and were clearly notable? Just asking because if there's a prize I might join in! Anxioustoavoid (talk) 12:38, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Piling on at this point. The Knowledge Pirate (talk) 16:40, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Even though there is admitted piling on, I can't see how we are meeting WP:SPORTCRIT here, which says that All sports biographies, including those of subjects meeting any criteria listed below, must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. That is a specific subject notability requirement that one such source be on the page, and not just presumed to exist. If we can find actual sources, I'll revisit this, but as things stand, it has to be a delete per P&G. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 16:51, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: WP:SPORTCRIT requires that we have at least one piece of independent, significant coverage. Currently, we have zero, as it is unclear if the presented reference is independent or was created by the Olympic committee. As such, the WP:GNG isn't met now. Let'srun (talk) 14:45, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete agree with Sirfurboy that there is some dangerous and obvious piling on here that I hope any closer would take into account. This article fails WP:SPORTCRIT by the letter and is non-notable. Should be merged if a better target could be found and presented. Ping me if so. Otherwise this should be deleted. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:59, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • The keep comments are "dangerous"? How so? And do you seriously think that someone who never lost at the Iraqi championships, someone praised to this day as their "immortal Golden Champion", who we even have one piece of SIGCOV for (SPORTCRIT), would not have been further covered in Iraq when active? Such an idea is absolutely and utterly ludicrous, especially since no one has searched even one Iraqi archive from his era! BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:13, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      We don't know if that source is independent though. If it is by the Olympic committee, they would have plenty of reason to write puff about one of their athletes. Let'srun (talk) 20:44, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      His known accomplishments (never losing at the national championships – where he did so well that people stopped competing in them – winning the Arab championship and thereafter being known as the "Golden Champion") are so significant that I don't think that's a "puff piece". And do you seriously think that he was not covered in Iraq when active – when modern sources (including independent ones) call him one of the stars and icons of his era? BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:53, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      We should never assume who would and wouldn't have been covered during any time period. Rather, we should look to find WP:SIGCOV actually covering said WP:BLP. Let'srun (talk) 15:33, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      When we haven't checked even a single source from the subject's era and everything points to him being extremely notable, considering the likelihood of coverage existing is certainly reasonable. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:43, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Presumptions are not enough. Per WP:SPORTCRIT, even with a presumption of notability, we need one such reference in the article. It is not the existence of 1 reference that shows notability. We need existence of multiple IRS SIGCOV references for that. It is specifically one IRS SIGCOV reference must be in the article for any argument (such as yours) that the subject surely must have coverage for some reason. To be clear then, this does not meet SPROTCRIT and it definitely does not meet GNG. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 18:17, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can the newspaper article in question be verified?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 22:30, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Star Mississippi to reply to you specifically, there is no record of the newspaper article in question of where it is. We have a picture of it posted to a facebook page by the national olympic committee and that is it. The actual newspaper, like the name of the publication, author, date, etc is not mentioned. In that manner, the newspaper article cannot be verified by me since I don't know which newspaper it is in. That is why I am ruling out NEXIST since to rely on the newspaper would be an assumption, let alone a plausible BLP issue, that is based on a Facebook page from a non-independent facebook user, in this case the Iraqi Olympic Association, which would have an inherent interest in promoting its athletes regardless of whether such athletes meet any criteria that Wikipedia has or decides on later. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 15:21, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If it is some random person on Facebook posting it, perhaps it could be an issue. But that is not the case. There is absolutely nothing to indicate that the Iraqi Olympic association would fabricate old newspaper articles on their athletes. The reason no one else has found it is because no one has looked at any Iraqi newspaper archives, despite it being abundantly clear there would be coverage there. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:26, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In any event, nobody has been able to verify the independence of said article because we don't even know where it came from. As such, WP:NEXIST is an invalid argument in this discussion. Let'srun (talk) 20:06, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree to some extent, although what's the likelihood that anyone could or would do that? We have something that looks like a newspaper which nobody can verify. Maybe it is real, maybe it is a fake, how would we tell? Presumably there's a list of Iraqi boxers or Olympic athletes, normal practice in these kinds of topics would appear to be to combine stubs until verifiable references are found to expand the page, no? JMWt (talk) 10:23, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"maybe it is a fake, how would we tell?" We know it is not a fake with 99.99% certainty because its the freaking Olympic association posting it. The chances they would decide to fabricate very old newspaper articles about one of their athletes from the 1950s is essentially zero, and to assume it is a fake is completely ludicrous. It is also completely and wholly nonsensical to assume that there would be no further coverage of him in the Iraqi media of the day, given we know he was a famous national figure known as the "Golden Champion" and remembered today as the sports star of his era! "normal practice ... would appear to be to combine stubs [until it could be expanded]" – combine stubs? I could certainly turn this into a high-quality article with verifiable information we have currently, and I'm sure it could be a GA or better if we actually look in newspaper archives. BeanieFan11 (talk) 13:47, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well no, it appears to be the Iraqi Olympic Academy. Is that the same thing as the Iraqi Olympic Committee? Probably not as they have their own FB page 1. We don't normally consider things produced on Facebook to be a reliable source of information. It may well be true that a better page could be written if there was access to the archives, but that's not really the question here. JMWt (talk) 14:09, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I just want to make a point that the issue is not that the newspaper article might be a fabrication, it is that if we don't know where it came from we are unable to assess its reliability or independence. How can we know that the publication the article was taken from is reliable? For what its worth I think that if the statements attributed to the article are true, the subject is likely notable enough for inclusion and it would be possible to find other articles about him even if we can't locate this exact article. However I don't know the language and don't have access to old Iraqi news archives so I can't look for any sources so I don't feel like I can vote either way, but the onus should be on the people arguing for inclusion to address the lack of sources issue by either providing details of where the referenced article comes from or alternatively finding other articles on the subject that prove he is notable, WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES is at best an argument for draftifying over outright deletion to give editors time to find hard to find sources (in this case likely in paper archives), it is not a good argument for the article to be kept in main space in its current state. Giuliotf (talk) 15:43, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 05:39, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:V we should delete anything which isn't verified after a challenge. Once that content is removed, there's not much left WP:NOPAGE JMWt (talk) 10:20, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment there's some seriously mixed-up thinking going on in this AfD. AfD does not work the same way as verification of a line of text in an article, where on challenge the line must be removed if no source can at once be attached. At AfD the rule is that the proponent of deletion must demonstrate that sources don't exist. If evidence indicates that sources do exist, then the article can't be deleted, even if the person who finds the evidence that the source exists can't/won't follow-through to actually use the source in the article. The questions before deletion should therefore be: (1) Are we convinced the photo is a fake? (if so, of course we can delete); (2) If the photo is not a fake, do we have reason to believe that the newspaper it depicts is not reliable? (because it's the newspaper that confers reliability, not the place where the photo of the newspaper was made public). Elemimele (talk) 11:18, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Eh? How do you prove that something doesn't exist? I don't believe we should have factually inaccurate information in Wikipedia pages. How are we supposed to patrol that without being skeptical about content we can't verify? JMWt (talk) 11:26, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Nothing in the article is possibly factually inaccurate. BeanieFan11 (talk) 13:47, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    ok, well that's your opinion. But that's fine, I'm out of this discussion. JMWt (talk) 14:10, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    My opinion? So, tell me something in the article then that could be false. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:54, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I had a quick scroll through WP:AFD - I'm not exactly following where At AfD the rule is that the proponent of deletion must demonstrate that sources don't exist is the rule - could you point me towards a PAG where this says so? InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 12:43, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    See WP:BEFORE, point 4, "If you find that adequate sources do appear to exist, the fact that they are not yet present in the article is not a proper basis for a nomination." I interpret this as meaning that if someone can demonstrate that sources appear to exist (in this case by producing a photograph of source) then the fact that the source isn't used in the article (because so far no one has traced it) is, strictly speaking, not a proper basis for nomination. But this is a horrible situation to be in, because it's not clear that anyone will ever be able to trace the newspaper. I also agree that it's impossible to prove a negative; nominators are expected to "find a lack of sources", but exactly how much effort you're supposed to go to to find that lack is a matter of personal opinion. Elemimele (talk) 13:47, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    So to be presumed notable for a page, there must be multiple independent reliable and secondary sources with significant coverage in each. See WP:GNG. Even if we allowed this as one such source (which is dubious, as we cannot assess its independence, although it appears to be secondary; the significance of its coverage is debatable, because it doesn't say much more about him than he won in the Arab Sports Games in Beirut in 1957 and again in a return match in Baghdad) then it is still just one source and GNG requires multiple sources. The onus is not on anyone to show sources don't exist. We've searched and not found them. That's the best we can do. The onus is on those arguing to keep the article to show that multiple IRS SIGCOV sources exist, and to place one suitable source in the article per WP:SPORTCRIT. If we had other sources, we could give this one the benefit of the doubt. But we don't. We don't know where this one is from, and cannot further assess it. In particular, we cannot use it to verify anything in the article. We absolutely need at least one other IRS SIGCOV source before this one can be given the benefit of the doubt. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:36, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I certainly agree that it's a bad idea to base an article on only one source (even two sources), and particularly so when no one can trace the source. That's why I deliberately made this a "comment", not a "keep" !vote. Elemimele (talk) 15:14, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

[edit]

Categories

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Boxing&oldid=1303782173"