User talk:PRehse/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Global account

Hi PRehse! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to ping me with {{ping|DerHexer}}. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 14:33, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for stepping in. I was making zero headway. Tiderolls 21:56, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Tiderolls Well no guarantees - he wasn't responding to his talk page before so he may not even see my message.Peter Rehse (talk) 22:01, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

TiderollsSee below - at least he is engaged and we should be able to sort out the issue.Peter Rehse (talk) 12:58, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Kageryu

Thank you so much Peter. The main problem I had was actually relearning the edit procedure I still don't like the original Wikipedia comments of linking it to the other Kage-ryu. If this is the case I can see see people getting confused and editing my comments. I realize I am in actual fact losing copyright by posting here. The original .com was plagiarized many times and due to hackers can only be edited by my host now. I notice the Niten ichiryu info on here has already suffered from "Brazilian intervention" and cannot even be editedChoken (talk) 23:58, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello Peter, I put up the correct kanji for Kageryu 景流 I have no problems with any relevant added information about the Ryu on Wikipedia. Its information only. The teachings themselves will remain intact and not published.

I was most concerned seeing what happened to Hyoho Niten Ichiryu where someone has posted misinformation about the lineage by actually using wikipedia. I myself tried to edit this information but was locked out. I wondered how this was possible as anyone seems free to edit my materialChoken (talk) 08:07, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Colin - thanks for the reply - people (besides myself ie. jni) were worried you would be chased away through misunderstanding. A couple of points to help clarify.

I assume by Hyoho Niten Ichiryu you mean Niten Ichi-ryū. Not sure about this case but in some instances pages are protected against new users primarily to defend against SPA (single purpose accounts) whose main purpose is to vandalize. The bar is quite low (measured in days and 10s of edits) so you should be able to edit anything quite soon. Let me know if let's say next week you can not edit and I will help chase down the cause.

The linking to the Aizu kage-ryu is actually beneficial. What the tag says is that this article is not about the Aizu ryu- please go here to find that one. In other words right at the beginning it says there is no connection and allows those who were after the other to be directed there. Perfectly acceptable for you to delete the tag if you wish but I wouldn't. It is just one of the ways wikipedia helps people to navigate to where they really want to go.

Finally the copyright - it is not just a matter of you losing it but wikipedia does not allow copypasted material from a copyrighted site. Right now much of the material you added is just that - which was the reason for all those revisions. That has hopefully been suspended for a little bit to allow you some time to understand the issue and correct it, but it wont go away.

Like I said I am perfectly happy to help you navigate - just ask. I have a clear memory of meeting you, the scene and what was talked about, but am unsure exactly where and when. It may have been on the way to the Philippines 10-12 years aqo or not.Peter Rehse (talk) 12:54, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

I believe the reference to problems with Hyoho Niten Ichiryu refers to Niten Ichi-ryū and Gosho-ha Hyōhō Niten Ichi-ryū (articles which are not protected or semi-protected so can be edited even before new user account has been auto-confirmed) and goes back to earlier dispute between Hyaku (talk · contribs) and NitenBr (talk · contribs). User:Hyuku very likely is User:Choken. There is not so much opposition to Hyuku/Choken/Colin's claims but edits like [1] simply got reverted for failing to adhere to basic editing conventions (problems like unverified claims backed up by personal opinion only, attempting to converse with other editors in text of article itself, self-references to Wikipedia policies in article etc.) jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 14:00, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Ah that would explain it. Note to Colin - some things are best left on the Talk page.Peter Rehse (talk) 14:38, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

• Peter, I'm still seeing copyrighted content on the subject article. I will give this a few days as I've see you've actually gotten Choken to respond, but if they have not followed the procedure for releasing copyrighted content for our use I will revert to the original version and block that editor. Tiderolls 17:26, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Tide I will try once again - but please give a couple more days. After that its fair game - we tried. It is sometimes hard for people to understand what the problem is but I do think we have been pretty clear.Peter Rehse (talk) 17:51, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Colin with note to jni As you can see above. An administrator Tide is calling on the copyright issue - and rightly so. There are two options. 1. Change the copyright notice on your http://www.hyoho.com/ site (which as you explained might be difficult). 2. Remove the copy pasted material on the Kage-ryū page. I will do that for you tmr evening if necessary. Best.Peter Rehse (talk) 17:51, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Or maybe option 3. Read Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries and then send the email described therein to OTRS. Option 1. might be unpractical especially if hyoho.com is going down in near future. We'd had to change external links to it to go through archive.org and hope the licensing info made it into their next web crawl. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 18:02, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Whichever option is chosen we need to avoid the impending ban. This also applies to the Hagakure Kikigaki page.Peter Rehse (talk) 18:05, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello Peter. The original hyoho.com has been hacked into a few times. The only one who can make changes right now is the host in Australia. I could contact him but the thing is I do not not intend to renew my subscription to the server. So hyoho.com will be down forever soon. So in future the only reference will be myself. Fine with me as I studied for many years and translated most of what is on hyoho.com anyway. T With regard to Hyoho Niten Ichiryu. Iwami Soke has Alzeimers and handed on the Ryu to a 12th Soke. So the circumstances have changed anyway. This Brazilian group are leaderless and seek credibility for financial purposes due to the second and third generation Japanese in Brazil looking for "samurai roots". The 8th Soke Aoki was also shihan of the Sekiguchi Ryu Ju Jitsu. They also did some Niten Ichiryu but but were forced to go their own way when the 9th HNIR Soke was appointed. I'm not sure but I am told the person who put all this alternate information on Wikepedia has fallen out with Kishikawa of Niten Brazil. if its freed up again it may be possible to put up some true undisputed facts. Nippon Budokan- Kobudo Kyokai has strict guidlines on this. One Ryu one group. "Ha" are sanctioned by a particular soke. You cant as they did just "make it up". I will continue to contribute here the source being myself as a Menkyo of the ryu sanctioned by the new soke who was my student. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Choken (talk • contribs) 05:57, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Colin I have to say again that none of the above matters with respect to Wikipedia. Please remember that anyone can edit and claim they are anyone they like. Articles have to have references and they can not be copy pasted especially from copyrighted text. jni offered you the best option - please follow it (Read Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries and then send the email described therein to OTRS). Another description is found on your Talk page. This is important for both the Kage-ryū and Hagakure Kikigaki page. More I can not say.Peter Rehse (talk) 10:22, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year PRehse!

Happy New Year!

PRehse,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:57, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2015}} to user talk pages.

Aikido Edits

Thanks for checking out the references - you're right, the reference didn't support the claim. I found this reference. http://dandjurdjevic.blogspot.ca/2010/08/leading-momentum-how-realistic-is-it.html; it confirms the information that was in the paragraph I edited. I'm going to revert the paragraph back to my edit (a more concise version of the original paragraph), but could you add the citation. I don't know how to do that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.49.14.185 (talk) 23:38, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

70.49.14.185 First of all Blogs are not considered reliable references and the author doesn't even do aikido, I think the Aikido journal reference is far better. I never liked the term blending (that is more style specific than general aikido) so it was good that you started the change but it is better to match the better reference.Peter Rehse (talk) 23:55, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Indonesian categories

Automatically default to 'category' without adding the word 'category' - there is no need to add the word satusuro 23:36, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Re:soccer kick

I think a category like that is a good idea. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 08:30, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello. This is a courtesy notification that the GA review of the above article has now concluded. Thanks, C679 07:35, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryan Martin (boxer) (2nd nomination)

Hi PRehse. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryan Martin (boxer), you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryan Martin (boxer) (2nd nomination). Cunard (talk) 02:59, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Paul Karger

Hi PRehse! Please make sure you notify creators of proposed or speedy deletions when you do place a tag. The curation toolbar and Twinkle both make that easy. Cheers! §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:03, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

I already made some modifications after you patrolled the article "Nuno Miguel Cerqueira Dias", can you please check it and let me know if it’s better now and if the issues alerts can be removed, or advise about what can still be improved? Thanks. VelaLatina77 (talk) 00:22, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

I already made some modifications after you patrolled the article "Nuno Miguel Cerqueira Dias", can you please check it and let me know if it’s better now and if the issues alerts can be removed, or advise about what can still be improved? Thanks. (VelaLatina77) VelaLatina77 (talk) 00:24, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

Changes made to Kim Yun-Sik page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Somdogalpao (talk • contribs) 03:28, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

If you feel like the article should be deleted than delete it. He did fight in Strikeforce the #2 MMA Organization of the World and is very well recognized in his Country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lugina K.O (talk • contribs) 03:30, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk headers

Check WP:TALK#CREATE. Talk headers[2] are only placed when there is some discussion on ATP. Thanks. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 17:37, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Dennis Avoth

Hi, I spotted that you have tagged Dennis Avoth as part of WP:YORKS but I am struggling to see why as there is no mention of Yorkshire in the article. May be I have missed something. Keith D (talk) 12:29, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Whoops Keith D - I got sloppy with a cut and paste. Meant to remove it.Peter Rehse (talk) 12:51, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Keith D (talk) 12:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

info box

Can you help me fix this? Thank you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_WooleyCrazyAces489 (talk) 23:18, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

CrazyAces489I had to remove the medal table - don't know how to put that in correctly.Peter Rehse (talk) 00:00, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

CrazyAces489 You need to do a better job with the articles you have created rather then just go for more articles. The references in James Thompson (Judo) don't match up to the statements and the listing of championships don't make any sense. The impression is that you don't even have a basic understanding what you are writing.Peter Rehse (talk) 23:32, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

What doesnt make sense? James was a 4 time Olympic Alternate for the United States. which statements conflict? CrazyAces489 (talk) 02:33, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Randa Markos

i don't get it what exactly is with Randa Markos page when I edit it? you guys have people less deserving then her n you have their pages made what my mistake so i can fix it? This make no sense. (User talk:FrogeyesIT)

User talk:FrogeyesIT Community consensus came up with notability requirements for MMA which Randa does not meet. There was a deletion discussion (see her talk page) which settled on a Redirect (I would have expected a straight deletion) Let her have a couple more top tier fights and she's in - but not yet. Constant reverts against community consensus might result in article changes being frozen which is a real pain when and if she does meet the requirements. Other less deserving articles means that those articles should not be there either.Peter Rehse (talk) 14:52, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

okay so what exactly are the requirements so i know for next time?

@User talk:FrogeyesIT Please see WP:MMANOT the section on fighters and a little further down the Tier 1 organizations. Personally I don't jump on fighters that aren't quite there yet - but I do like to see at least two top tier fights with at least one win. That usually means they have a chance of making it in the near future.Peter Rehse (talk) 22:18, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Martin Mubiru

Hi. Have you seen this article? Grammar and tense is ok? Sorry, I'm asking because I'm not native speaker :). Bándíttos (talk) 12:33, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

@Bándíttos It was fine - better than some native speakers. I just made sure it was integrated into Wikipedia a bit better.Peter Rehse (talk) 12:46, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Ron Duncan

I have found this article about him on Black Belt Magazine [3], he barely failed AFD a few years ago due to lack of good sources, [4]. A black belt magazine biography denotes notability correct? CrazyAces489 (talk) 19:37, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

@ CrazyAces489If I remember correctly there were far more problems than just references. Blackbelt magazine is what one would call borderline reliable - much of what is in there is pretty poor and as was mentioned in the AfD dependent on subject. In my opinion, Black belt can not be the only source and definitely does not confer automatic notability. I did find the Draft:Ron Duncan which you have been editing and the advice you were given there a couple of days ago is good. If you think it is ready take it to deletion review.Peter Rehse (talk) 13:32, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

It failed deletion review. [5] The problem according to the AFD was the lack of notability via sources. He had issues with black belt magazine for years and about 15 years after his teaching of ninjjitsu they gave credit to Stephen Hayes for bringing Ninjitsu to the west. In his death, they gave him long over due recognition. The article is much larger with more sources than before CrazyAces489 (talk) 21:27, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

References

Edit summaries

Hi, as a friendly reminder, please remember to use edit summaries when editing an article, especially when you add a PROD or AFD tag. For administrators reviewing your nomination, it makes it more difficult if we have to hunt through history to find it. Thanks. --B (talk) 01:19, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Articles

If you would like to fix them up you can. I don't own the articles. I saw that individuals who were on an Olympic Team qualified. So those are some of the articles I have made. The 1980 Olympics did occur and a source gave the members who were on the team. Even if they didn't compete that doesn't mean they weren't on the team. CrazyAces489 (talk) 22:23, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

CrazyAces489 The particular error was saying they competed in the USSR but that is not my point. Several people have pointed out how messy and problematic your articles are. They are all suggesting you take a bit more time per entry and focus on quality. That would help avoid all the AfDs you are being subjected to. Trying writing prose instead of short points - emphasizing why someone is notable rather than just listing facts.Peter Rehse (talk) 22:43, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

My AfD closure

Hello, PRehse. You have new messages at Papaursa's talk page.
Message added 09:12, 6 March 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Deryck C. 09:12, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Morihei Ueshiba and Yasunari Kitaura

Hello PRehse. Can you explain why did you delete Yasunari Kitaura from the list of Morihei Ueshiba 's students? BearWithoutHead (talk) 10:34, 6 March 2015 (UTC)BearWithoutHead

BearWithoutHead Please take a look at the list - all of them have their own articles. Normally for lists of this nature one would expect either an article or a reference. It is a partial, non-exhaustive list so his exclusion is not denying his place as one of Ueshiba's students. I said as much in the edit summary. I think you will be recreating the article eventually (I suggest doing it via a Draft article) so please re-insert back then.Peter Rehse (talk) 10:41, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Probably worth adding that he does have an article on es-wiki, though the sourcing there wouldn't meet our standards. There are probably enough sources out there to build an article, though; trouble is, most of them are in Spanish (otherwise I'd volunteer to do it myself). Yunshui ^雲_水 10:48, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Yunshui Did you see the Stanley Pranin article - I left some comments on the primary editors page. I think it will eventually need a hand.Peter Rehse (talk) 10:52, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I've got it watchlisted, though I haven't made any edits yet. We definitely ought to have an article about Stan, but despite his prodigious services to the aikido community, he hasn't been greatly noted outside it. And yet any half-baked local rapper with an allmusic account seems to have and article here... Yunshui ^雲_水 10:56, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

re: Olympic stub

Hi. There's no stubs for individuals, as they would already be stubbed by their country and/or sport. The Olympic stub is used for the country and event articles. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 12:33, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

LugnutsFair enough - I was reacting to a number of bio-stubs whose sole claim to fame was olympic participation.Peter Rehse (talk) 12:38, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

There's a few thousand of them! Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 12:49, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Kenny Adams

Hi, I was wondering what text needed to have sources or references on the Kenny Adams page? Anything added was taken from an article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigticket55 (talk • contribs) 01:11, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

@Bigticket55 I tagged it with needing more sources since the article is derived from effectively one source. (I know there are two others listed but still). Under the General Notability Guidelines you would need a bit more than that to establish notability. For a boxer that would be easier since the guidelines for WP:NBOX are clear but trainers are different we need multiple reliable sources. I like the article and I think it has a place in Wikipedia but it does need a few more reliable sources which I don't think, considering his stature, should be to hard to find. The problem is that there are a bunch of Kenny Adams that are not him. I put a Find sources tag on his Talk Page which should help - please take a look. The BLP sources tag itself is a guideline after article review - you could just delete it as it is only my opinion. However, I do recommend you add a few references.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:36, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

@PRehse Thanks for the help, I appreciate it. I just added a lot of new sources and references to the page. Check them out when you get a chance and let me know if you can remove the 'need for more sources' at the top of the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigticket55 (talk • contribs) 00:58, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Kimbo Slice

In response to this, see WP:LINKROT: "do not delete a URL solely because [...]" Also, they are still available at the Wayback Machine (here and here). May not be reliable, but your edit summary says "rotten references - no mention of Kimbo". --82.136.210.153 (talk) 13:55, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Mutual combat

Hi. In response to this edit. The idea of including Martialartsproject is that the article - as WikiProjectBannerShell puts it - "is of interest to" (editors of) that WikiProject. It's not a martial art, but both are combat-oriented. If you really think Martialartsproject should not be included, please also remove it from Talk:Street fighting (for consistency). That's where I saw Martialartsproject, after which I decided to add it to Talk:Mutual combat. --82.136.210.153 (talk) 08:27, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Ronald Hubbard

Look at the photo, he is a clearly he is an olympic alternate. [6] CrazyAces489 (talk) 17:56, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

CrazyAces489 Read it yourself - the word alternate never shows up. What it does say is the first and second place finishers go to the Olympic training camp followed by the first place going to the Olympics. The alternate is usually the second place finisher which Hubbard was not.Peter Rehse (talk) 19:50, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

He was the second alternate.CrazyAces489 (talk) 20:06, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

It says nothing of the kind in the picture. He didn't even go to the training camp. The point is - you are using a reference that doesn't back up the statement - that was why I changed it.Peter Rehse (talk) 20:09, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

David Sakurai

Hi! Please check the sources. He talks about the shorts he wrote and directed in the interviews, and see also Kung Fu Cinema. Thank you. Teemeah ^{편지 (letter)} 12:26, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Teemeah Please put something in the article itself before assigning categories. Also please take a look at the Category:Martial artists inclusion criteria. The problem, not just for actors, is over categorizaion on the most tenuous reasons.Peter Rehse (talk) 12:30, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

This link is already in the article, so are the interviews (Asians on Film). I added one more source. Teemeah ^{편지 (letter)} 12:37, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

By the way, the definition for martial artist on the top of the category page is ambiguous and b definition wrong. Is Jet Lee not a martial artist then? Because according to that definition one has to derive a significant portion of their income through martial arts. Well... a martial arts actor does exactly that kind of thing... Gets his income by doing martial arts on screen. And if Jet Lee, who is China's national champion 5x in wushu is not a martial artist according to this definition, then I don't know who is. Because he no longer competes. But it would a huge stretch to say he is not a martial artist. Teemeah ^{편지 (letter)} 13:36, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Teemeah I only touched on the discussion when it was ongoing but the reasoning behind it was the huge number of actors that claimed to be martial artists that could never credibly claim to be such. I think with regard to actors like Jet Lee it is not an issue because at least at sometime in their life they were primarily martial artists. A martial artist who became an actor rather than an actor who does some martial arts. I think the same sort of reasoning applies to a martial artist who appeared once or twice in a film - that does not make him an actor. Most people realize that the line is a bit hazy and the wording reflects that. I hope that helps.Peter Rehse (talk) 13:50, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Teemeah If you are interested (and also so I can find it later if someone asks) the discussion is found here.Peter Rehse (talk) 14:04, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. I still don't agree with this decision wholeheartedly, because the definition who practice and derive a significant proportion of their income directly through martial arts (fighting systems or codified combat practices) is exactly the definition that would exclude Bruce Lee, Jet Li or even Donnie Yen or Tony Jaa from the category of martial artists, especially the latter who never had direct income as a martial arts sportsperson (eg competing in amateur or professional contests), and neither did Jet Li ever have any income from his wushu champion titles at the age of 12 :)) But it would be really akward if these people, who are undoubtedly martial artists, to be exluded from the category. I think we can separate those actors who pretend to do martial arts on screen (like Keanu Reeves), and are "taught" the moves prior to filming from actors who actually actively train in martial arts without ever pursuing competitions. David Sakurai is no exception. He might not be as famous as the above people but he trained in various martial arts since he was a child and trains to date. Teemeah ^{편지 (letter)} 15:12, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Re: Okatch Biggy

Hello, PRehse. You have new messages at Gogo Dodo's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Eric Sollee

Hi PRehse, I'm very new to writing and editing Wiki. Eric Sollee is my first article. Someone, some group, or something (e.g. a script) has determined levels for the article. I'd like to find out about the process. I'm quite happy with the B for the article in general. I'm mostly interested in WikiProject Fencing determination of class=C and importance=Low. Who and how is this determined? Criteria? thanks. Rob RobSVA (talk) 23:28, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

@RobSVA First of all please don't worry too much about the assessment - it really is not a reflection on the quality of your writing and frankly when Start becomes a C or C becomes a B is often a judgement call based on experience with other articles. In your articles case I felt that the level of detail did not warrant a B. It really is quite a short article - although you did a good job. The criteria can be found here. Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment. Hope this helps.Peter Rehse (talk) 23:50, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

@Prehse. So the the rating for the WikiProject Fencing refers to the current quality of the article as opposed to the interest / importance of the subject of the article? If so, that's good, I can keep work on the quality. thanks. RobSVA (talk) 23:55, 21 March 2015 (UTC) BTW, I see that you are a student of the martial arts. Eric Sollee had an unusual background for a fencer. He grew up in the Philippines and was exposed to a variety of martial arts there. He was a boxer long before he learned fencing (starting in college). He used a combination of Eastern and Western philosophies and martial arts in his teaching of fencing. He also used a range of sciences of the body, the senses, and the mind. We were taught to fence with the senses of our fingers and ears, not just with our eyes. (finger senses are faster than the eyes due to the decrease in processing time). He taught us about the shortcuts that the opponent's brain uses to reduce processing load and how to take advantage of that to in effect become invisible during brief periods of time. For example, if you set up a steady pattern without a threat, the opponent's brain gets used to it and doesn't monitor as closely the actions in between. Thus if you change the pattern, the opponent might not notice until the next action in the pattern fails to occur. He also used the Socratic method and knew that he didn't know everything. John Tsang, currently the Finance Secretary of Hong Kong, is an MIT alum and was an assistant coach under Eric. John competed in Martial Arts at the same time. He broke his arm in a tournament and had to learn to coach fencing using his other arm for awhile. If you get a chance, read Johan Harmenberg's latest book (epee 2.5) for a lot more of the story, especially on how to take away your opponent's strongest moves and force him to set up your strongest moves; it's applicable to most if not all martial arts. RobSVA (talk) 12:23, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi PRehse, Thanks for the help on citations. Quick question, do you know how to have Wiki display the "source code" within an article? Specifically, on a talk page, I wanted to show the way to properly write a citation while in edit mode. RobSVA (talk) 15:04, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

No idea.Peter Rehse (talk) 15:05, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Jose and Ron

kCrazyAces489 (talk) 21:04, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

when the trio starts deleting, I find that it is setting up articles for AFD. CrazyAces489 (talk) 21:08, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Well since I am part of your trio - let me point out that they have never deleted an article - they have only nominated. Admins delete.Peter Rehse (talk) 21:33, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Greg Baines

You said you'd prefer a redirect in this AfD discussion and Papaursa found a reasonable target at the Joe Lewis article. If you're interested I filed an ANI against CrazyAces for his comments about us being racists.Mdtemp (talk) 19:13, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

@Mdtemp Yes I saw both the Redirect suggestion and the ANI. I agree with the former (was going to comment) but for the latter I would not have said anything if I were you and won't add any comments. Not that he isn't out of line but I see no benefit coming out of it. In the SPI debate (again I said my piece once) I don't think to many people don't understand what's gong on.Peter Rehse (talk) 21:14, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

The funny part

I haven't been real active on martial arts articles lately and if he hadn't started spamming claims about Duncan into articles on my watchlist, I might not have noticed the article. Niteshift36 (talk) 20:19, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

@Niteshift36:It is funny how that works - he gathered more attention from the fuss than he would have otherwise. Reminds me of the vatican banning films before they realized that only increased the interest. Lots of people have tried to help him and gotten burnt. Still I like the idea of a Ron Duncan article - even though I have a distinct bias against the American Ninja - he really was an interesting character.Peter Rehse (talk) 20:27, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

• I'm not going to nominate it for AfD again. I personally think Duncan was reasonably notable, but I could see someone making a good argument about the lack of significant coverage by reliable third party sources. Niteshift36 (talk) 01:53, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Rinat Hasanov article

Hello, PRehse:

I have been focusing on fixing Checkwiki errors. Today, I came across the article "Rinat Hasanov", which had been PRODed, to fix an error #52 "Category before last heading". I almost never try to resurrect an article, but something about this article struck me. Because the guy's MMA record isn't too bad??? Because the guy is from Azerbaijan and I like to give people from smaller countries a chance??? Because I could see that somebody with a lot of heart but not the best English skills had worked hard on the record table at a minimum???

In any case, I did a first editing pass on the article. In addition, as the biggest complaint seemed to be lack of reliable sources, I found one.

While I handle Checkwiki errors, I see many garbage articles from self-promoting people (who should learn about LinkedIn). The 15-minutes-of-fame singers especially bother me. These articles exist without getting PRODed.

I hope you will see the merits of keeping the "Rinat Hasanov" article.

Now, back to Checkwiki errors. Knife-in-the-drawer (talk) 11:18, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

@Knife-in-the-drawer By coincidence I was just in the process of sending the article to AfD on notability grounds. Thanks for finding the reference and I too like to avoid domination of large countries but in this case I really don't think he is notable. There are plenty of people form Azerbaijan that are. When I do send it to AfD - perhaps you can make a case there.Peter Rehse (talk) 11:25, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Justin Gaethje

Is he not notable now? WWE Batman131 (talk) 17:16, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

@WWE Batman131 I think the AfD got it right. Nothing has changed with respect to yesterdays fight.Peter Rehse (talk) 17:49, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

I understand. I think you should explain the situation to the user who has contested the deletion on Justin's talk page. If you'd like, I could request an author's deletion of the page. WWE Batman131 (talk) 17:54, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

@WWE Batman131 I would just leave it - I am watching to see if there are any stronger reasons posted. I would not do an author requested deletion either. The only real danger is a salt if there have been multiple recreation/deletions but I don't think that was the case.Peter Rehse (talk) 18:02, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Mahmoud Mohammadi

Greetings. I just changed my recommendation on the article, based on a careful reading of WP:N, its predecessor WP:IMPORTANT, and the discussion that accompanied the change. The article is backed by 2 reliable and extremely different sources--a strong criterion for inclusion. I urge you to give it some attention. Regards Tapered (talk) 02:40, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

@Tapered Which references for which article - for the athlete or the title?Peter Rehse (talk) 10:00, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't read Farsi!, but I'm assuming good faith translation--that Mohammadi is mentioned in both articles, which according to WP:N would seem to qualify him for a stub article, but nothing more. As I read the criteria. That's why I changed my recommendation. I based my initial 'vote' on reading of editors' various comments in the AfD section. THEN I read WP:N, and then WP:BIO. Ass backwards, mea culpa. Hope this clarifies my 'thinking.' Tapered (talk) 01:26, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Glory 21: San Diego

Hey, is this normal? Seriously? Hard7kek (talk) 15:48, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Hard7kek Perfectly normal. You should have contested the speedy deletion for the Repost instead of removing the tag but I see now that a new AfD has been put up - that gives you a chance to make your case. I did not comment on the original AfD but I can not find fault with the closure. It is a future event and the question on notability was pretty open. In the new AfD that is what you should concentrate on.Peter Rehse (talk) 15:23, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Ok, but can you post your opinion please? If it's needed to be kept or not? I invite you to do that. Hard7kek (talk) 16:25, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.[7]. Niteshift36 (talk) 20:25, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

• You may find this comment interesting [8]. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:37, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

The full comment at the ANI was spot on and I do hope the AFC suggestion is taken seriously - it would certainly help. I actually think he has a useful place here once moderated. Of course we shouldn't poke the bear with a stick - I didn't pick up on the bolding right away either.Peter Rehse (talk) 15:10, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

• He just picked up a block. And yeah, the bolding was too far. That's why I removed it. Niteshift36 (talk) 03:52, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

April 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Tube Bar prank calls may have broken the syntax by modifying 4 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *''Tube Bar Collector's Edition|Tube Bar Collector's Edition (2-CD Set)]]'' (1/1/06, T.A. Productions)
• *''Tube Bar Prank Calls 35th Anniversary Complete Collection]]'' (09/01/10, T.A. Productions)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:01, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Morten Storm article

You claimed I did not source the article I created. However, had you looked at the talk page, you would see that I am in the process of translating the equivalent article from the Danish Wikipedia. My source is that article, as cited on the talk page in accordance with in accordance with WP:Translation. Please remove the tags you added. Drummerdg (talk) 00:19, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

@Drummerdg: All you did was attribute - the article still needs references. Not difficult to do just move them over from the Danish article and then I will happily delete the tags. References don't have to be English although that would be good. If you could also add some categories that would be appreciated.Peter Rehse (talk) 07:44, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

@PRehse: It was my understanding from the translation procedures that attribution of the foreign page was in of itself the required reference. All of the references from that article are in Danish, so they wouldn't be easily verifiable by English editors anyway. Meanwhile, I've noticed others are adding references in English, though that should be superfluous assuming one trusts the sources of the Danish article. Also, I did add the category {{Denmark-bio-stub}} to indicate that this was a biography of a Danish person, and was a stub as I had not yet finished translating. I will likely finish translating today.

@Drummerdg: Its a good article and thanks for your efforts translating it. That section only talks about attribution which is more to do with copyright. One way of thinking about it is that wikipedia should never be its own reference within a language or between languages. Anyway, references have been added which was the whole point of the tag. The Denmark-bio-stub is just another tag and when I was reviewing the article I was having trouble placing it in a proper more specific category - still am. In the end I put in Spies and Danish Muslims but there must be better ones. Danish references in the absence of English are perfectly fine - but as usual for English wkipedia English references are preferred.Peter Rehse (talk) 07:19, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

re: Arnis Categories

Hello good sir!

I'll be moving the Eskrima Category to Arnis to reflect the name change of the Eskrima main article to Arnis. Will do a bit of refinement & cleanup on the categories page on the Arnis page as some of them seem a bit superfluous, but some of those you removed do belong. Cheers! -Object404 (talk) 10:06, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

@Object404 I understand. I noted the reason for the change of the article name from Eskrima to Arnis and it makes perfect sense for the Category name to be changed also. Let me look into that a bit. It might be easily done.Peter Rehse (talk) 10:11, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Talkbacks

Hello, PRehse. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mixed martial arts/MMA notability.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

WWE Batman131 (talk) 17:11, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

dcw2003 here

I was very intrigued by the recent discussion as to whether being a Boxing Coach at Yale for 46 years satisfied the wiki requirements of Notoriety as opposed to a boxer who clearly was a World Title Holder.

Lets start with the importance of being a lifelong instructor at an American Ivy League College as far as it influences history and sports. The American game of football was not created by the NFL, but by Ivy League colleges around 1860, probably by Rutgers University around 1870 when they first used the forward pass to differentiate the game from English rugby. The game was subsequently popularized by Ivy League Colleges long before professional football had a footing. A number of Supreme Court Justices, including "Whizzer White" played football for Yale. Teddy Roosevelt boxed for Harvard. John Kennedy swam for Harvard, and used his skills when he swam four miles to rescue the wounded crew of the PT-109. Both Bush Presidents played baseball for Yale. Small and mid-sized American newspapers at the turn of the century till the 1940's were able to survive by covering sports, often boxing, to steady their circulation during the depression.

Mosey King coached boxing at Yale when it was easily one of America's most popular sports, and essential to the survival of many American newspapers. He was never a World Title Holder, but he coached and was a confidant to a few. He probably influenced hundreds of America's future leaders, and certainly the leaders of New England industry during his tenure as Yale Boxing Coach. He was the first Connecticut Boxing Commissioner, and a good one by all accounts. He was so beloved by Yale graduates that they councelled him on his investments, and he died a very wealthy man though he made a fraction of the money earned by boxing World Title Holders, most of whom died penny less as a result of the depression. Sixty years after King died in 1950, the Clinton's and the Bushes still stack their cabinets with Yale graduates. In fact, the entire neo-conservative movement in America, which gave rise to the Bush Presidency was loaded with Yale graduates.

How important or noteworthy is it to teach and coach sports at Yale for fifty years?

Its a thought provoking question.................

Thanks for your Suggestion!! I will take more care when moving from Draft to Article.

1 I am having a bit of trouble uploading new photos that are post-1923. I use the non-free photo, free use as illustration of historical incident, but sometimes this works, sometimes it doesn't, and they are deleted.

Any suggestions. This has been a problem. I of course try to use photos on wiki, that already have free liscenses, but these often simply don't exist for the topics of some of my articles.

2 BY THE WAY< IF I USED HIGHLY RANKED BOXERS or contenders (preferably both), I assume from your previous comments that I SHOULD have obtained noteworthyness according to Wiki Rules, correct?

I wasn't trying to waste your time with my longwinded description of Mosey King's experience as a Yale Professor as being noteworthy, it was interesting. I do worry that I may be writing up articles that will not comply with Wiki Noteability standards.

THANKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WikiProject Film

Hello! Thanks for all the work that you've done in adding film articles to {{WikiProject Film}}. Just a couple reminders, the film project does not use the importance scale, so please do not add the |importance= parameter to the film banner, it will just take up unnecessary space. And when adding the article to task forces, please make sure to use the proper abbreviations ("Canadian", not "Canada", "Japanese", not "Japan"). You can check out Template:WikiProject Film/doc for more information. Thanks again, and keep up the good work! Fortdj33 (talk) 20:18, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Esfinge

Greetings, I am trying to figure out exactly what is overlinked in the Esfinge article? I see nothing that strikes me as redundant or anything else so please let me know why you tagged the article. Thanks. MPJ -US  21:42, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

@MPJ-DK:I tagged it for later clean-up by myself. It is not so bad but in theory there should be only one link per term. I will do some clean-up now.Peter Rehse (talk) 21:47, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

James Takemori

I was wondering if you think this page should be nominated for deletion. From the sources given, it seems the club that the man co-created was not relevant until it merged into a larger one. I would nominate it myself, but I'm not exactly sure how, and would rather not make a dim witted mistake. If you agree with my viewpoint and are not busy, could you nominate it for deletion? Thanks for your time.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 12:18, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Maybe notable maybe not but you have had issues with the creator. Not really interested in being part of that.Peter Rehse (talk) 12:54, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

I didn't realize it was CrazyAces, nevermind it will have to be someone else's problem I suppose. I don't want anything to do with his "work". Perhaps if he took more than five minutes to write an article than so many would not have to be considered for deletion. Thanks for informing me, I will move on.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 13:01, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Nicolas Dalby

Hey Peter, can you take care of Nicolas Dalby? He's nowhere near the notability specifications and the article has been created with no care at all. Thanks brother. WWE Batman131 (talk) 01:31, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

@WWE Batman131: I hear you but he did win his first top tier fight so I don't think Db-repost from the old AfD would work. In these cases I would just taq it and give it a chance to grow. I might think it too soon but ... a new AfD seems more trouble than its worth.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:59, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Redirs

Is there some sort of a secret trick for finding redirects that link to non-existent pages? (Saw this because it was in my watchlist.) — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 18:18, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Jeraphine Gryphon No secret - on the left side border of the page, right under tools, click on What links here. I like to clean up links to deleted articles that I am watching.Peter Rehse (talk) 18:51, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

question

Am I paranoid or does user 71.183.12.120 remind you of someone? Papaursa (talk) 20:58, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Papaursa Maybe paranoid. I found another user who is for sure a reincarnation but in that case writing style is distinctive enough. I think this is just a drive-by IP. I reserve the right to be wrong.Peter Rehse (talk) 21:06, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Justifiable paranoia, I claim. The specious arguments were reminiscent and location matched. I hope you file an SPI for the reincarnation. Papaursa (talk) 21:11, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

I noted it at Mkdw's talk page. I think having multiple accounts is not an issue if they are not being used at the same time or abusively. In this case I thought is was a valid attempt for a clean break and so just filed the info away for when its needed.Peter Rehse (talk) 21:22, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

At WP:Multiple accounts it says "It is recommended that multiple accounts be identified as such on their user pages", so hopefully that was followed--especially for a user with a dubious history. Papaursa (talk) 22:34, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Whisperback

Hello. You have a new message at Kudpung's talk page. 11:12, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Ewart Potgieter

This was an article about a boxer that you (correctly) tagged as a significant copyvio, and I have deleted it. I wonder if you would be so kind as to review the other edits by the user in question, User:Jose Luis Rama Narbona. I suspect this may not be the only copyvio, but I've never been all that good at finding the originating sources, while you seem to have a bit of a talent for it. Thanks for your work! Risker (talk) 01:07, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

@Risker: I had already taken a look. The big issue is the article on Gogea Mitu where there is a bit of an edit war going on reverting copyvios. The same issue is with Frederick Kempster where there is a copyvio from http://www.thetallestman.com/frederickkempster.htm. Based on the history of tag deletions and revisions I personally think a block should be considered. Call me a coward but I have already done revisions and put a couple of warnings and it would be better if someone else took it further.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:30, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Good grief, he reposted the Ewart Potgieter article - without changing a thing. I've left a strongly worded warning that if he does it again he will be blocked, and advised him to review his other contributions for copyvio as well. Thanks for your work in this area. Risker (talk) 13:07, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

@Risker: Well then I will give him a day or so to review before pushing on the other two articles I mentioned. Don't expect too much.Peter Rehse (talk) 13:10, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

@Risker: Well its heating up - please see history of Gogea Mitu. @GM83:Peter Rehse (talk) 22:36, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up for that. I think I have addressed this, for now. It is quite possible that he picked up his bad habits from reading other articles in his area of interest (Louis Cyr certainly reads like a copyvio, but I don't have time to figure out what the source is, and is one of the first articles he edited). I'll take a look at the Kempster article as well. Risker (talk) 02:20, 16 June 2015 (UTC) Addendum: Those copyvios deleted as well. Risker (talk) 02:26, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

And as another aside - Seems to me that www.thetallestman.com may be a significant issue all by itself, as I found at least one copyvio there that was also reproduced here, and I suspect that they've also reproduced Wikipedia articles on their site without attribution, which becomes one of those circular "which content came first" problems. One of the early articles this fellow edited turned out to be a copyvio from a Canadian website (original info there was from 2003, added to article without attribution practically verbatim in 2006) and I wound up having to delete the whole thing since the few edits before then didn't even establish notability. Well, for that matter, I'm not sure notability was really established even in the deleted article. But if he was looking at the WP article, and then going to look at thetallestman.com and saw the same content, it's understandable that he might come to the conclusion that "matching" articles to websites was okay. Risker (talk) 14:31, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

@Risker: In their current form all the articles on boxers should be deleted on notability grounds - even though the older version of Gogea Mitu may have some merit. I know we are supposed to assume good faith but with the editor in question you may be looking too hard to justify his edits. What I will be doing is waiting a couple of days to see what develops and then make a call on taking them to AfD - my usual practice for questionable martial arts/boxing articles.Peter Rehse (talk) 14:39, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

@Risker: Ok I AfD'd Ewart Potgieter and Jim Cully but restored Gogea Mitu to an earlier version which was better sourced and I believe free of copyvios. If I had not done that it would have been included in the AfDs. I will leave the other problem articles from that editor (now blocked) to others.Peter Rehse (talk) 11:12, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, PRehse. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 09:49, 15 June 2015 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Yunshui ^雲_水 09:49, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

To prehse, what do you think about addressing "Aikido not for fighting" - do you think that's appropriate for the Aikido article, I don't see that addressed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.134.108.10 (talk) 08:06, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

It is mentioned in mental training but with the aikido article is about aikido in general not what a particular style emphasises or using selective quotes from Ueshiba. Somehow that sort of thing might fit better into the article on Ueshiba.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:49, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Ueshiba also said, "Basically in aikido, the opponent is killed with a single blow", so selective quotation may not be the best way to present his views on aikido as well as aikido generally... Yunshui ^雲_水 10:24, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Red links

I see... That apparently occurred during my work-related hiatus. Regardless of that, I am considering the implementation of a different format, which would use the abbreviations for the weight classes instead of the organizations. That should reduce the amount of links drastically. I am, however, not yet sure how to fit "super", "interim" and "diamond" titles into that format. - Caribbean~H.Q. 12:57, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

@Caribbean H.Q.:Well good luck with that - it certainly needs some simplification. Truth be told I tend to globally delete links to recently deleted boxing/martial arts articles (my thing) but in this case all it left was an m which was even worse.Peter Rehse (talk) 13:05, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

List of QuizUp Topics

You nominated List of QuizUp Topics for speedy deletion under criteria A7. A7 is for non-notable web content. The topic of QuizUp is notable: there's already an article on it. I've removed the speedy deletion tag. The PROD will remain... —Tom Morris (talk) 20:48, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Atticus Lish

Hi PRehse,

You removed the Mixed Martial Arts category from the Atticus Lish page. While not an active professional fighter, this guy is as far as I can tell the only person to win a pro MMA bout and a major American literary award. Is there another way to link this page to the MMA subject on Wikipedia? Mouthwash15 (talk) 16:59, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

WP:MMABIO vs WP:NMMA

So i noticed that Thomas Vasquez was AfDed and I thought to myself, "man why are 2 people interpreting the guidelines differently than i am, what the heck is going on here". Well as it turns out WP:MMABIO and WP:NMMA are just different enough to cause this problem. WP:MMABIO reads "Fought at least three (3) fights for top tier MMA organizations" and WP:NMMA reads "Have fought at least three (3) professional fights for a top-tier MMA organization, such as the UFC". I don't personally have a preference, or know how to move forward correctly with unifying them so they read the same. As a side note Brian Hall (mixed martial artist) is going to have the same issues that Thomas Vasquez does. Please let me know how to proceed or how i can help. Kevlar (talk) 08:17, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

I noticed that too and was holding off commenting on the AfD. I thought it was a good chance to clarify and was hoping others would chime in. In any case WP:NMMA carries more weight than WP:MMABIO with the latter being an essay. Let's see how the AfD plays out but in the end we will probably just modify WP:MMABIO.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:22, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Tadashi Abe for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tadashi Abe is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tadashi Abe until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 01:34, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

List of the 72 Shaolin martial arts

Hello, I am a Chinese Martial arts historian. though the "72 arts of shaolin" do make fantastic claims, none the less, there is document evidence they were practiced.

E.G. iron shirt techniques, that could stop primitive firearms&arrows, but failed to stop modern firearms I.E. boxer rebellion rifles.

as well as legitimate skills such as "leung ying jow" Dragon-claw used to develop hand strength.

I would like to implore you to help me restore the article simply for the sake of scholarly astuteness even if the skills are implausible.

Pleasant regards Todd Livingstone — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:196:4400:EF1E:5D98:19B7:F3F5:2034 (talk) 17:32, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Bibhuti Bhushan Nayak

Hey, PRehse (talk · contribs) you just tagged the article "Bibhuti Bhushan Nayak Singh" as non-notable, non-neutral and orphan. Thanks for your tireless work and not outrightly deleting the page. Ill soon update the article to be neutral and non-orphaned, however I believe that you are mistaken in believeing that the subject of the article is non-notable. Please elaborate :) Cheers. Space.mountain9 (talk) 13:03, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Jeimeson Saudino article

Hi. I see you undid my speedy deletion nomination of this article. Which is fine— do you think you could explain why in the article this person is notable? I do not know very much (read: anything) about mixed martial artists, but the notability criteria are pretty clear and I don't see how this person meets them (not that he doesn't! Just that nothing in the article looks like it tells me this! And I hate nominating articles for deletion that are truly notable). Thanks! KDS4444^Talk 09:39, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

@KDS4444: You are right that there should be something more in those articles as to why the person is notable. User:Kevlar has taken it upon himself to fill in missing fighters that meet the criteria but as a result his entries are a bit sparse. I added something to your note on his talk page.Peter Rehse (talk) 09:49, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Steve "Nasty" Anderson

Competitor of the Year for black belt magazine, 7 time international champion and 3 time national champion, and more. Multiple covers and articles [9] and [10]. I believe notability is established CrazyAces489 (talk) 07:57, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Peter, I wanted to let you know I removed the notability tag on this article. He's been written up in many magazines over the years and his sport karate record is virtually unmatched. I'm not sure I can readily put my hands on articles about him, but I've read many and have no qualms about saying he's notable. Papaursa (talk) 01:59, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

@Papaursa: No issue but thanks for letting me know. I only added it back because I thought it was improperly removed. Someone else originally added it.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:02, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Shaolin ruins

Seems just more of the same attempts to create a history for this. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Southern Shaolin Temple of Fu Qing (Ruins). Doug Weller (talk) 14:24, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: Of course it is - I was trying to find a good way to deal with it. If anything it could be inserted in the main Southern Shaolin Temple article in non-absolute terms. I modified the latter a little too.Peter Rehse (talk) 14:43, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I didn't think you took it seriously. IMHO it needs not just reliable sources but something to show that it's a significant view. Otherwise we end up publicising a view held by a small number of people, which can result in the end with the main source being us. Doug Weller (talk) 14:50, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

@Doug Weller:Strangely I spent time very close to the site.Peter Rehse (talk) 14:55, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Lucky you. I feel fortunate to have spent a week in China, but could easily spend more time there if I could teleport! Doug Weller (talk) 15:04, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Emile Grémaux, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Coach. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 18:13, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for getting in touch re: Yin Yoga

HI PRehse,

thanks for your friendly note. i sure can use as much help as i can get with this project. Question, can i send you a reply back from my talk page? that is where i found your note. i'm not sure moonriddengirl is going to see what i wrote here there so i also left a note on her talk page. appreciate your help here and would welcome any you migh wish to give me on making the Paulie Zink page a nice and useful one.

i'm already trying to figure out how to upload photos. i thought i got one up but then i didn't know where it went! Thanks again! Taoyin2004 (talk) 16:04, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

@Taoyin2004: I answered on your talk page.Peter Rehse (talk) 16:20, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

@PRehse: i think it went to moonriddengirls but i just saw it and went to my user page, said start it and left you a test msg there. your user name was not in blue so i don't think i did it right. copied your format from above to try to reach you here too.. : )

Taoyin2004 (talk) 18:03, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

@Taoyin2004: I edited so that it works - basically you have to put two square brackets to either side.Peter Rehse (talk) 19:06, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Paulie Zink page

Hi PRehse,

Moonriddengirl added in some text after that first line you edited, and i just added a line with the reference to a book Paulie Zink co-authored. Would you mind checking it and letting me know whether i am doing it right or not? i made a comment about the reason for the edit. do i need to do that? am i on the right track? thank you so much! Taoyin2004 (talk) 20:28, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

@Taoyin2004: Looks good to me.Peter Rehse (talk) 20:32, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

oh good, thank you very much. Taoyin2004 (talk) 20:42, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi PRehse,

i just added in more details to Paulie Zink's championship wins. i haven't figured out how to link the reference and then add the retrieved 'date' part. Can you help me with that? i did pull the information over from the Yin Yoga page and changed a couple of words. it is reference 20 on the yin yoga page. is that okay to do? i just want to get the information over that is already there then build in more details and sections. and i need to know how to add the links in correctly. thanks for your help. : ) Taoyin2004 (talk) 17:25, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

@Taoyin2004: You are doing fine.Peter Rehse (talk) 19:20, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

thanks for the help and encouragement! Taoyin2004 (talk) 21:03, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

walter meegan

Hi

I recently created a wiki page in the name of Walter Meegan an early 20th century artist.

It appears that you have deleted the page, could I politely ask why ?

And how I could with alterations ensure this page is acceptable.

The reason I ask is Walter is my Grandfather and I often get asked questions from those collectors interested in Walter and his history, a Gallery in the USA also contacted me regarding similar information, I thought it would be much easier for all concerned if the info appeared on wikipedia.

Voidedlongcrss (talk) 16:18, 21 July 2015 (UTC) Yours

Simon Baines aka voidedlongcross

@Voidedlongcrss: Simon - I don't delete articles but do, during the review process, sometimes put tags that may result in deletion. I do remember your article but not what tags I put on it. However, the article, if my memory serves, made no attempt to show why he was notable. It would also have helped if there were some reliable third party references. Sooo - can I suggest you re-create the article in draft space using the article for creation process. Let me know when you do and I can be more specific where it needs help. Just remember that notability must be demonstrated - has he been written up in any newspapers or magazines?Peter Rehse (talk) 16:31, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

AfD for Athletics at the 2015 Southeast Asian Games – Men's 100 metres

Based on your participation at the previous deletion discussion, you may be interested in the ongoing deletion discussion for Athletics at the 2015 Southeast Asian Games – Men's 100 metres which can be found at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Athletics at the 2015 Southeast Asian Games – Men's 100 metres (2nd nomination). ~ Rob^Talk 09:00, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

The Colgate Sports Newsreel

Thanks for adding the WikiProject Radio template on Talk:The Colgate Sports Newsreel. I appreciate your interest, and I hope that others will contribute to the page. Eddie Blick (talk) 19:13, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	Thank you for sticking up for us nerdy academic types at WP:AfD. Bearian (talk) 23:06, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Bearian laughs - this long term academic type just does not react to well to abusive paranoia.Peter Rehse (talk) 23:14, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Bellator 142 / Glory 24: Dynamite

Hi Peter. I should have checked with you to see if it was okay to create the article. I just thought this would be easier to work on and that it's something different from the others. I'm okay with whatever you say. Thanks. WWE Batman131 (talk) 22:37, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

@WWE Batman131: No issues - you don't need my permission. Creation makes sense to me - it is notable as a combined event.Peter Rehse (talk) 22:44, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Seyed Farshad Dereke, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Iranian. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:49, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Lauren Cimorelli

It wasn't actually copyvio, because Wikia is CC-BY-SA (unfortunately - we get a lot of fluff copied from there!) I tagged it db-person instead, and it has gone, and been salted. JohnCD (talk) 19:35, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

JohnCD I was going to ask you what CC-BY-SA actually means but I can guess. Cheers.Peter Rehse (talk) 20:00, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

"CC" says it's a Creative Commons license. "BY" means that any copying must provide attribution, and "SA" (share-alike) means that material copied or derived must be distributed under the same license. That's the license WP uses, so anything released under that can be copied in here with no copyright problem. There are other variants, "NC" (non-commercial) and "ND" (no derivatives) which are more restrictive, and not acceptable as a source for WP. All explained at Creative Commons License. JohnCD (talk) 20:21, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks.Peter Rehse (talk) 20:23, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Joe Ellenberger

He doesn't meet WP:NMMA and I don't think the coverage meets GNG. Yet his personal story is interesting and I think he'd have gotten his third top tier fight if he'd stayed healthy. My strict WP nature is to delete this, but part of me doesn't want to. You share many of my views but seem more moderate than Papaursa. Any comments?Mdtemp (talk) 18:20, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Mdtemp He has a hook for sure but as you say the WP:GNG just isn't there. When I saw the article I had the same feeling as you but decided is some one else proposes him for AfD I would support the deletion. In other words I would not caste the first stone. Ideally this would be a Redirct with a short paragraph in Jake's article.Peter Rehse (talk) 18:40, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Why don't you go ahead and redirect the article? That seems like a good compromise.Mdtemp (talk) 18:44, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

MdtempThe article was created by FrogeyesIT - lets give him a heads-up and ask his opinion.Peter Rehse (talk) 18:49, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

FrogeyesIT If you want to redirect the page, then go right ahead. I like making pages for MMA fighters, I try meet the requirements but as you said its not all there, you guys are the boss if you want to delete of redirect it, I don't mind.

Thanks FrogeyesIT - nothing worse than creating articles and then having them deleted - and this is not so bad an example that cries out for deletion. I'll see what can be done. (notice Mdtemp).Peter Rehse (talk) 11:20, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Looks like a good conclusion.Mdtemp (talk) 17:11, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes Mdtemp - seems pretty straight forward now that it was done.Peter Rehse (talk) 17:17, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Revert on Danielle Smith page

Fair enough, thanks for explaining the revert. You mentioned in your edit comment that the articles did exist but were elsewhere. Could you help me find them? I tried searching high and low and I couldn't find them. Thanks Nefariousski (talk) 00:58, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Nefariousski I am actually quite worried since AikidoJournal has for a long time been a great resource and the change will effect a large number of articles. The change over is recent and the problem could go away but well I am seeing what I can do. My view is that in the worst case scenario they will have to be treated as dead links - ie. not necessarily deleted.Peter Rehse (talk) 09:50, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

BLPPROD decline of Den Klyuev

The decline was not that the subjects own website is considered a reliable source. The decline has to do with the way the WP:BLPPROD policy is written. In the Before nomination section it says, "Make sure the article contains no sources in any form, which support any statements made about the person." The way this has been interpreted is if there is any source, reliable or not in the article, BLPPROD can not be used. The only time that a reliable source is required by the policy is if a BLP without any sources in any form is tagged with a BLPPROD, then a reliable source must be added to remove the BLPPROD. I know that does not seem right but that is the way the policy is written. -- GB fan 14:23, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

GB Quite right - that nuance slipped my mind - corrected the AfD and thanks for pointing that out.Peter Rehse (talk) 14:41, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

WSOF

I Disagree the criteria for a Promotion to be notable are as followed

( *Subject of multiple independent articles/documentaries--articles should be from national or international media, not just local coverage.

• Promotes a large number of events annually--the more fights it has sanctioned, the more notable.
• Has actively been in business for several years - the longer the organization has been around, the more notable.
• Number of well-known and highly ranked fighters. )

They have had over 20 events which have been broadcasted over multiple television stations and are covered all over multiple MMA sourced websites and beyond including Yahoo.com, they currently have over 3 top 10 ranked fighters as of August 2015 according to sherdog.com's MMA rankings, including Marlon Moraes, Rousimar Palhares, David Branch, Jake Shields and Justin Gathje they have been around since November of 2012 which is making November 2015 their 3rd year of being in business the promotion and its events hold notability as a top tier organization holding monthly active events JMichael22 (talk) 19:33, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

With all of the criteria for a Top Tier Promotion as of August 30, 2015 WSOF meets all of the requirements to be Top Tier promotion they hold monthly events as does the UFC, They Hold Top 10 Ranked fighters as does the UFC they are covered by many articles by major websites and have multiple television deals as does the UFC they have done the work to meet a Top Tier Company and the only thing that seemed to hold them back before from being one was their fighters who are now currently Top Ranked there should be no reason why they aren't anymore JMichael22 (talk) 19:45, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject assessment

Always appreciate you doing the project assessments when I create a new article for the MA project (I see you've done two today!). Many thanks. Yunshui ^雲_水 14:35, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Unified Weapons Master

Greetings PRehse! Thank you for reviewing the page. I was wondering if you had any suggestions on improving it. Any suggestions would be great. Thanks again! DaltonCastle (talk) 22:43, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Zach Appelman

Hi. Now that there 8 references, is that enough to start the page with out Notability? - Kiraroshi1976 (talk) 01:00, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, PRehse. You have new messages at Morinae's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for your help in editing my first page, I greatly appreciate it! Lionwarriorab (talk) 19:48, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Please clarify why you added the 'Orphan' tag for article 'Dinker Belle Rai'

Hello,

I am new to making edits on Wikipedia. You undid a change I made to the article 'Dinker Belle Rai'. The change was that I added references to this article in the following articles 'List of Tulu People' and 'List of Bunts' and thereby removed the 'orphan' tag on the 'Dinker Belle Rai' article. You have undone this change and reinstated the 'orphan' tag by stating 'lists are not articles'.

Unless I'm missing something, 'List of Tulu People' and 'List of Bunts' are articles and appear to be 'List of articles' which do count as incoming links per the wikipedia:orphan page guidelines so I'm confused why you still marked the article as 'orphaned'. Please clarify

To quote the wikipedia:orphan page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Orphan) guidelines,

"The following pages do count as incoming links:

1. Any article in mainspace except those specifically excluded above 2. List of... articles 3. Set indexes" — Preceding unsigned comment added by SPUN1976 (talk • contribs) 22:57, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

September 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to The Drifters may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Ronn McPhatter, son of Clyde McPhatter leads a group called Clyde McPhatter's Drifters.<ref>[http://www.cmdrifters.com Clyde McPhatter's Drifters featuring Ronn David McPhatter</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:03, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Help - Self-Promotion and COI Attack by Competitor

Help is needed. This is Model Mugging regarding evidence of self-promotion and COI regarding attack on us by competitor.

There has been no reply to the talk on Model Mugging. This editing game Wikipedia has does not seem to have any standard rules, especially for libel-slanderous behavior. The last edits to the Model Mugging editing war are wrong.

In a prior edit, Peter Rehse wrote “Wikipedia is not here to advertise any entity but to provide information” – I ask whether rumors is providing information because it falls into Wiki’s tabloid journalism definition. The author of that article says she is writing about rumors.

Why are Wikipedia editors insisting on a source that the author admits to being rumors and from another lying Wikipedia editor?

I am hopeful, because upon reviewing the history of the Model Mugging page, Wikipedia editors saw what Impact was doing in 2005 as self-promotion and personal advertisement. Model Mugging was unaware what Impact was doing at that time.

It is my hope you are simply unaware of what Impact is up to again in 2015.

Do you see a problem with Impact self-advertisement? I put a picture summary report together with a small amount of historical background – please click to view summary report: http://modelmugging.org/history/impact-self-defense-wikipedia-attack.pdf

I have identified tag teaming efforts of Nefariousski in latest Impact Self-Defense attack against us. She is loaded with hypocritical contradictions such as COI, biographies of living persons (BLP), lack of editing balance, failure of editing in a NPOV, disregard to consensus for disputes, using an unreliable source to make libel-slanderous statements. And she is involved in a campaign to promote a competitor, Impact Self-Defense.

The Impact group has repeated misquoted a training incident that occurred 30 years ago that made it into a tabloid magazine written by Peri in Mother Jones. The American Press Association Principles of Journalism identifies "journalism‘s first obligation is to the truth, and also discipline of verification. . ." as listed on the APA website. The Peri article violates the APA’s principles. The source also falls into Wikipedia tabloid journalism definition and sensationalism.

Nefariousski and other writers insist on using the term ‘sexual assault’, which is not used in the article. Even after Nefariousski was corrected by FreeRangeFrog about her inappropriateness of using the term “sexual assault”, she insisted on using it. Additional editors have also changed the current line to be even more inaccurate. However, ‘rumor’ is used numerous times. Peri writes, “The staff of Women Defending Ourselves had finally begun to feel empowered, but it was a passive sort of empowerment, based on whispers and rumor campaigns instead of direct confrontation.” A 25 plus year old rumor campaign is exactly what Nefariousski, as Impact, is doing!

How is this single source claiming rumors thereby reliable? Mother Jones was not a major publication in 1990, especially when publishing admitted rumors and is loaded with misinformation?

Nefariousski-Impact tag team planned to link the Wikipedia ESD page to a derogatory Model Mugging Wikipedia page highlighting a tabloid source written with accusation heading, “controversy”. Impact also wrote a promotional page and pasted it into her Sandbox. They are also getting around Wikipedia rules against self-promotion using Wikipedia search engine ranking by keeping their page in the sandbox status - FIRST PAGE on search results for "Empowerment Self-Defense".

PLEASE CLICK the pdf link as evidence to view images in summary report of her COI campaign promoting Impact Self-Defense - again: http://modelmugging.org/history/impact-self-defense-wikipedia-attack.pdf

Is this "nefarious" behavior? Should she be blocked and all her edits scrutinized? Does Wikipedia see a problem with hypocritical editor(s)?

I had written a response in Model Mugging Talk PRIOR to discovering the ESD page.

We need the Model Mugging site corrected and will also need protection against other Impact organizational associates tag teaming inaccurate edits.

Thank you for your assistance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiipedia-posting (talk • contribs) 03:54, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Greetings. Please try to use edit summaries more. You've been around for ages, so it feels funny asking, but I am. You reverted one of my edits and I don't mind one bit. It is just nice to know the rationale so I can improve. Plus, you know the other reasons for edit summaries: it saves us time checking to see what the edit was about and digging for who did what etc. etc... Best wishes, my friend, and thank you. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:41, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Anna Frodesiak Quite right - I do get lazy. Usually its with quick run through of new articles that cross in front of me where its not just one point. In the case of the template removal I did not think that particular template was relevant. Usually the article where the template is put should be mentioned in the template and that template was more about the breeds of cats than the internet phenom (embarrassing for the human condition that it is). Cheers.Peter Rehse (talk) 11:14, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

No worries about the edit summaries. It is sometimes hard to keep in mind. As for the template, I knew when adding it that it had a fair chance of being removed. I thought it actually might encourage others to see if it needed rearranging to allow it to accomodate such a bizarre topic. Best wishes. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:18, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kickboxing, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wushu. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:17, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

New IPs

Peter, what's with the new IPs all voting alike in the AfD discussions? Think we're looking at sock or meat puppets? I also noticed you haven't voted at several of the more contentious discussions, although you have commented. Papaursa (talk) 20:24, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Papaursa I think the IP is the same person and I would hope the closing admin would recognise that. I though I voted in most of them eventually although in one case Kenichi Sawai I did not want a delete but could come up with no good reason for a keep. I like the work of that articles primary author so I am biased by choice. On the others I will get off the fence.Peter Rehse (talk) 20:41, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Seeking your collaboration on article Dinker Belle Rai

I have spent a lot of time on the article Dinker Belle Rai to make it factual and to make it conform to Wikipedia guidelines. I did not remove the two remaining tags that were added by you because in a true collaborative spirit, I would request you to review the article in its present form and remove the tags yourself. If there are still lingering issues, please clarify and I would like to work with you in making this article 'issue free'. Thanks in advance for your cooperation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SPUN1976 (talk • contribs) 02:38, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

SPUN1976 For sure you have don a lot of work and the overall tone is much improved - I removed that tag even though it still feels over the top to me. It is very clear that this is an autobiographical piece (the plastering of images alone tells us that) and I think that tag should remain. I have decided not to submit the article for deletion debate although I was considering it. The tags themselves are not a bad thing for the article - they are meant to attract attention of other editors to contribute and improve. This is a good thing especially with regard to something you have written about yourself.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:53, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Peter. You may recall through our past discussions that I'm new to editing on Wikipedia. I have definitely learnt a lot through our interactions. Cheers! Sid P (talk) 15:20, 11 October 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.121.48.81 (talk)

Help With Relate links

Hello, Could you help me how to Relate Link to another article? I wrote an article and it got orphaned, i dont know how to Relate to other links, if you can help me, i be greatful Tian men ren 1987 (talk) 18:16, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Tian men ren 1987 What orphan means is that no other articles are connected to yours. I searched and could not find any articles where I could put in a link to the movie. The point of the orphan tag is to ask others to help, there are people who like to do that and are good at it. Don't worry about it and with luck someone will help. If an article was written about the director than that would be an obvious place for a connect. I hope that helps.Peter Rehse (talk) 18:27, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Ok I understand now, thank you so much for the information and help, I'm really greatful (talk)

Aspy Adajania

Hi mate, I noticed that you have put notability tag on the article on Aspy Adajania. The article was part of a project on missing articles on Padma Award winners. Per WP:ANYBIO, a major award establishes notability of the subject and Padma Shri is a major Indian award, the fourth highest in the award hierarchy. Further, regarding third party references, of the eight references given, six are news reports in major Indian newspapers (Indian Express, India Today, Times of India) and the remaining two are Government of India sites. Thought I should bring it to your notice. Cheers !--jojo@nthony (talk) 11:03, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

jojo@nthony The article talks mainly about his boxing contribution which overall is not that notable and all the newspaper references are about someone else with only passing mentions. I also did not think the award as fourth highest (~3000 awarded) would confer notability itself. It came into my view as a boxing article which I cleaned up and tagged appropriately I thought. I don't have a strong opinion so by all means remove the tag but I do suggest the case for notability is strengthened in the article.Peter Rehse (talk) 11:20, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Mate, for the quick revert. Beg to differ on Padma Shri; from an Indian perspective, it is one of the most coveted awards, like an OBE or MBE in UK, which are the fourth and fifth highest, respectively, in the British award hierarchy. Leaving that aside, Adajania's main contribution is his introduction of a Cuban boxing coach for Indian amateur boxers, when Cuba was reigning the amateur boxing world. The legacy is that some of the Indian boxers like Devarajan and Vijender Singh have later won at international level. I am removing the tag but will try to add more information when I can take a break from my current project. Thanks for the chat, Mate, Cheers!--jojo@nthony (talk) 11:40, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

I second Tachs. I removed the tag. The discussion btw, should have taken place on the said article's talk page. Solomon7968 11:46, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

jojo@nthony and Solomon. I appreciate the point of view but really neither OBE or MBE in itself makes one notable. One wold like to think those that get that sort of award (including the Indian version) would be notable for other things (wikipedia def) but that is not always the case. Anyway notability tags are cries for attention rather than sanction so all is good.Peter Rehse (talk) 11:59, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

This is unfair. The article does contains supporting wiki-text except the award bit for making a good claim for notability. He did some things which Government of India deemed enough to give a highly selective award (3000 out of a billion+ gets it). I would reiterate what I said earlier, that "The discussion should have taken place on the said article's talk page". Solomon7968 13:13, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

User:Kagite/BK A10

Hi, the A10 speedy delete criterion only applies to articles and not to userspace. For this sort of page, WP:MFD is the process. If you are actually User:Kagite you can add the db-g7 template. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:03, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Graeme Bartlett I saw that when you last declined (at that time I changed it to a Redirect) but there have been a number of Draft deletions along the same lines - most recently Draft:Iraqi Professional Players. Generally speaking (and I am of course willing to be corrected) an article should not remain in Draft space if it exists in Article space. I am not User:Kagite but was helping him save the article from AfD during which process he moved it for safe keeping.Peter Rehse (talk) 21:16, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

If it was draft space, I would change it to a redirect. Perhaps you can do that too. Since it is Kagite's space I would expect that he is in control of when the page is not required, but do you have a talk message from him that says it is not required? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:52, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I am the author of the article. Sorry, I didn't know the draft page had to be deleted. It seems somebody already did the job for me, the page now redirects to the article. Thank you. Kagite (talk) 23:33, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Mahadeva Achchirama Children Home

Since you have previously edited the above article, is it possible you to fix the copyvio problem? UmakanthJaffna (talk) 13:59, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Hemi Ahio

Why is the article Hemi Ahio I created up for deletion? There is absolutely nothing wrong with it.

Kind regards, JS 09:01, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

I created the same article about a month ago but it was deleted due to not meeting Wiki Notability standards They same article has been created here but with his birth name --Bennyaha (talk) 21:49, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Just to clarify I am not saying it shouldn't be deleted because I think it should at this stage --Bennyaha (talk) 21:50, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

New Companies delsort category

Hi PRehse: Just a heads up that a new deletion sorting page was created on 16 October 2015 for companies, located at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Companies. Thanks for your work in performing deletion sorting on Wikipedia. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:22, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

New Disability delsort category

Hi: Just a heads up that a new deletion sorting page was created on 19 October 2015 for Disability-related articles, located at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Disability. Thanks for your work in performing deletion sorting on Wikipedia. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:12, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Mak Yuree

Hello PRehse! Thanks for your contribution towards making the article Mak Yuree better. I'd like to have your help with a little bit of problem. The 12 no. reference, that I mentioned in the Early Life sections has got some problem with the ISBN number of the magazine. For better clarification, you can see the cover page of that issue here, where the ISBN number is clearly visible. I'm in a hesitation whether the last two digits '12' should be included in the ISBN number or not. And, the cover story that is written about Mak Yuree doesn't particularly mention the author's name. So what should be done in this regard? Tanweer^talk 17:05, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Tanweer Ignore the ISBN number - the information in reference 12 is sufficient. Now that you are here can I also suggest a bit more care is taken with some of the over the top claims. Frankly high dan grades and your own style leaves a bad taste and is not an indication of notability. That would come from the Discovery Channel exposure and the article should not be a reflection of his web site. Again just a suggestion but I believe the last AfD vote for deletion was because of the hype. By the way school means the school he runs not that he attended.Peter Rehse (talk) 18:11, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm conscious about being neutral in all possible aspects. Trying to put the facts without any exaggeration. I'm not a native English speaker and if any words or statement depict such hype, please feel free to indicate that. Thanks. Tanweer^talk 18:18, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Tanweer You are doing ok and I can see where you are taking care. The previous article was very heavy with references to self-congratulatory SOKE councils which is a huge red flag and why I proposed it for deletion. The references are better now. By the way doing an NRA training course is not at all notable and makes one wonder about the value of other claims. I will probably go and do some trimming/fixing when you have had a chance to add the information you think needs to be there.Peter Rehse (talk) 18:26, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

I was aware of the incident that the previous article on Mak Yuree was heavily stuffed with self-publicizing statements and non-reliable references. And I was not a contributor to that article. I have gathered quite a good number of reliable references and sources, and just here to mention the facts. By the way, I'm not finished yet adding contents, so it'd be better (think so) if you do the fixing afterwards. Also, I am not a martial arts expert/connoisseur. So please enlighten me about putting the right qualification or degree/training. Thank you. Tanweer^talk 18:35, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Tanweer Don't worry I wont touch it for another week or so maybe longer - might not even touch it at all. It is fair game to list that he is the founder of a style and ranks himself 10th Dan but I would do it once and leave it at that. For example in the MOS for martial arts they warn against overusing titles like Soke or Grandmaster just because the number of people who claim that but are anything but. Like I said before you are doing fine.Peter Rehse (talk) 18:41, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, the article has been just nominated for AfD. Would you please help indicating the reasons for why this should be deleted, so that I can amend the article to meet notability? Thanks. Tanweer^talk 19:25, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Tanweer I suspected it would be put up for speedy deletion since it was AfD'd previously. What you need to do is contest the deletion by clicking the blue contest icon in the message. For reason I would say the article was written from scratch and unlikely to be similar to the previous version since you did not see it. Care was taken to include reliable third party sources with notability provided by Discovery Channel exposure. The reasons for the previous AfD no longer apply.Peter Rehse (talk) 20:21, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, just contested the deletion. You may put your say there. Thanks. Tanweer^talk 20:35, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

I think there's now been enough added to support his meeting of WP:GNG. I certainly don't think this is an obvious delete, which is usually enough for me these days. I'll admit that I'm a less enthusiastic editor than I used to be, which is why I seldom put things up for deletion any more (though I'm still plenty willing to comment at AfD). Maybe it's just me getting old, but I'm less willing to put up with BS these days, which may be why I started my first SPI. I will compliment Tanweer on his talk page for his work on this article. I did cringe a bit with the constant use of the word "superhuman", but that was from the Discovery documentary. Papaursa (talk) 03:39, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Papaursa It is hard for me to take the subject seriously but that might be my bias talking - ok I think Yuri is borderline clown but Tanweer has done a decent job and there certainly seems to be enough there. There is a whole rash of kickboxing and boxing articles I would like to take to AfD but I too can't be bothered - keeping them on the back burner for when I get inspired. I have gotten pretty good at predicting the amount a hassle it will generate AND the amount of hassle I can put up with.Peter Rehse (talk) 14:52, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

The kickboxing articles aren't so bad, but the boxing criteria is so inclusive as to be excessive. At least some of the most egregious cases have proven that NBOX isn't necessarily enough on its own. I know how I used to tense up every time I put an MMA article up for deletion (or even voted on one)--it made WP editing painful. Papaursa (talk) 00:44, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

CrazyAces

Thought you might be interested in this [11]. Given my history, I check this occasionally.Mdtemp (talk) 19:58, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Mdtemp I am watching it already but I had nothing to add. Seems a little pointless even though I am sympathetic.Peter Rehse (talk) 20:03, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Short draft article, would you mind reading it? "World Head of Family Sokeship Council"

Would you mind taking a look at this draft? Draft:World_Head_of_Family_Sokeship_Council a frustrated newbie hired me and I've rewritten and cleaned it up. There are a few more mentions in press, mostly mentions as practitioner credentials though. I'm going back through then now.

(You were helpful with another article I authored Harold G. Long, Google is finding more on him now.)

You appear to specialize in the genre, your input is appreciated, Thanks! -- Paid Editor -- User:009o9^Talk 20:22, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

User:009o9 I am sorry but I don't think I can be that helpful with this group. Basically in the martial arts world its considered a running joke. These self congratulating soke councils (there are more than one) refer primarily to themselves and are not notable. Found your own style, award yourself a mega rank, find someone to accept it - is the pattern here. There was a reason it was declined by AfD and I am afraid you have an up-hill struggle.Peter Rehse (talk) 22:28, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, the article was in very poor shape as submitted and the editor earned himself a block, I guess I'll just submit it and see what happens. Thanks again! -- Paid Editor -- User:009o9^Talk

Sorry I could not be more helpful - I admit to a serious bias here.Peter Rehse (talk) 23:01, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Edits to Corrie Sanders talk page

Hi PRehse, I received an email about an update you made to the talk page of boxer Corrie Sanders (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Corrie_Sanders).

It now has a banner which starts with: "This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons policy, ..."

However, Corrie died after being shot in a robbery more than three years ago (Sept 2012). So does this "living persons" banner still apply?

Thanks Xtal42 (talk) 04:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:09, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Randall Kleck

Peter, I'm curious as to why you removed the American martial artist category from this article. Surely someone who does karate, sanda, kickboxing, wrestling, and boxing is a martial artist. Papaursa (talk) 03:30, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Papaursa not sure either. Maybe I got caught up in trimming categories and thought karateka and martial artist were redundant without reading the article. Who knows.Peter Rehse (talk) 11:38, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Your edits to Stampede Wrestling

I'm not entirely sure I understand the point of this. From what I remember, Ron Starr and Duke Myers were in plenty of main events in Stampede. Therefore, your edit sends a message that Stampede Wrestling matters zero to the context of notable alumni of Stampede Wrestling. It's bad enough that the article is one huge coatrack either to WWE or to various non-notable happenings in Alberta since Stampede folded (which, based upon Chris Jericho's account, would include a "Hart training camp" that the Hart family was involved with pretty much in name only), and has precious little to do with the actual history of Stampede Wrestling. And you want to push it even further in that direction, and for no reason that I can see other than perhaps some people are bothered by looking at redlinks? Seeing as how there's a standalone list, I would question whether the section is even needed (see this edit for reference, where the section was eliminated in favor of a hatnote). RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 19:13, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

User:RadioKAOS It was because there was a stand alone list of all the alumni that I altered the section title and content to include only those name with articles. There is a lot of precedence for this - it the man is notable it would be expected he should have an article. I actually would, as you mention, not even have that section, but thought more would be against an outright deletion.Peter Rehse (talk) 21:26, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

"it the man is notable it would be expected he should have an article" is nice in theory, but try taking a good look at the situation. Only in a Bizarro World of historical revisionism and "the blind leading the blind" such as the Internet would anyone believe or expect others to believe that a wrestler who main events Boys Club gyms a few times a month in front of 50 or 100 people apiece is "notable" while someone who main evented in a territory isn't. You're honestly going to try and tell me that Moose Cholak and Cowboy Bob Ellis aren't notable? Dead or long-retired people aren't hiring social media consultants or otherwise gaming the Internet to get their name out. That has a whole lot more to do with our coverage than anything having to do with notability, whether real or perceived. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 21:50, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

User:RadioKAOSBy all means put them back in - but I think if there is no article there should be at least a reference to show their notability. Otherwise its just an added name.Peter Rehse (talk) 22:05, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

I didn't even address the issue of "lists" which serve to provide gratuitous wikilinks, possibly at the expense of providing actual information relevant to the article. That's probably a greater policy issue, though, as it seems many believe that lists need only serve the former purpose. The criteria you outline is exactly the same approach I take to a list entry. But back to Stampede for a sec: ever watch the 1961 footage of Mat Time that WWE acquired from Gorilla Monsoon? That footage alone would cause me to rethink what I may have previously known about Stampede. For one thing, Ed Whalen was bald and spoke in subdued tones in the early 1960s, yet had a full head of hair and was "Mister Ring-A-Ding-Dong-Dandy-Malfunction-At-The-Junction" himself in the 1970s and 1980s? As Whalen himself would have said: "How about that!" Love the latter-era photos where he tinted his toupee gray(!?!). RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 23:09, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

RfC

You were in a discussion which is relevant to a RfC I started see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing#RfC: Flag icons in professional boxing record tables 92.237.211.110 (talk) 05:21, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Re: Boxing MOS

I think it's pretty much ready to go, and I haven't had any widespread opposition to the formats I've laid out (some of them quite ambitious, such as the use of tooltips to explain UD, TD, etc.), but frustratingly the debate still lingers on regarding those bloody flagicons. Several editors on both sides of the issue are digging their heels in with that, which means I can't very well publish an MOS without universal agreement on all the sticking points. Observe the number of times a roaming IP has recently reverted my changes at Billy Joe Saunders. In fact, likely the same IP has been trying to introduce them repeatedly since last December.

Meanwhile, at Floyd Mayweather, Jr., User:TwoNyce is essentially claiming article ownership by not allowing any of my changes to the record table. Look how nice and clean I managed to make it look! However, his lame rationale is "Not gonna discuss situation on a separate article", even though I've since invited a token discussion at Talk:Floyd Mayweather, Jr.—no response from him, so clearly not interested in the MOS initiative. One wonders how he'll react if/when the MOS gets published. Surely he wouldn't have a leg to stand on if he doesn't even get involved in the discussions? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 21:52, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

That only speaks to the need to get something in place ASAP. Let me know when you are completely finished and I will ask once more for comments and then we can put it up after one week. The Flag Icon issue does not really speak against what you have written in the MOS so I would not worry about that discussion so much. Again a good and very necessary job.Peter Rehse (talk) 22:10, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

OK, that's the bulk of it finished now. If there's anything left to do, it's either minor copyediting or tweaking of the bullets here and there. I'll likely add less important elements such as succession boxes or 'See also' sections later. If other editors reject it for being too comprehensive or long-winded, then that's too bad—it's a manual, after all. The constant edit wars over inconsistencies and flagrant disregard for basic things like case ("Lineal Light Heavyweight World Champion".. ugh) were exactly why such detail was needed. Over to you. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 16:44, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Just a thought—seeing as User:Fallengrademan has started canvassing other users in a non-neutral way, I'm considering taking the discussion to MOS:ICON for even more views if enough "pro-eye candy" editors pop up, or if the RfC reaches a stalemate. Maybe they'd be more knowledgeable, impartial and proactive about these debates than the handful of folks at WikiProject Boxing. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 23:07, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Shrug. Mac Dreamstate I find it hard to get excited about the Flag issue for the record tables and strangely WP:MOSICON is a little ambiguous saying that if there is contention they should all be removed. Does that mean if there is no contention they should or could stay? Personally I like the look of flag less records ala MMA and don't think the flags are necessary and I'll eventually say that but my fighting habit has always been to wait, wait and annihilate. With respect to canvassing that could just as easily backfire. The mention on the MMA project so far has only brought someone who routinely ignores consensus. Still if you mention it couch it in terms of the ambiguity and ask for advice.Peter Rehse (talk) 23:33, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

User: Mac is the only one bringing up "ownership" of pages. I said nothing about owning an article and he can't find proof anywhere that I said such a thing. Not only he says how nice and clean he made this. LMFAO I've been here editing the professional records of almost every boxing article since 2006/07 and I've seen my fare share of some pretty bad edits on record sections and this takes cake. Not only that he says he tried to say he invited to a discussion on the Floyd Mayweather talk, which is a lie. He tried to invite me to converse on Talk:Joe Calzaghe, about Floyd Mayweather article. A completely separate article, which Is why I said "Not gonna discuss situation on a separate article" on the edit summary. It was then he decides to start on conversation on Talk:Floyd Mayweather, Jr.. And with that said I don't wanna converse with him. By what I've seen so far you can't reason with him. And by the way if his MOS does get published (which i think it won't) I could care less. Ill adapt just fine. -TwoNyce 22:59, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Doesn't sound like you'll adapt much at all, if you're clinging onto 2006–07—Wikipedia in its infancy—as something that should be relevant now. All you've shown is how many routes it took in order to get you to say anything at all when you reverted my edits to the Mayweather article. Invitation #1, dismissed. Invitation #2, dismissed. Invitation #3, I get called a "bully" for being proactive and trying to get as many users to discuss some changes. Joke's on you. If you're that slow on the uptake and only care about a bunch of flags, don't go whining if an MOS finally gets cleared whether the flags stay or not. And if there's anyone unable to be reasoned with, it's you. The last time someone tried to engage in discussion with you about weight class consistency and other stuff, your response to their invitation was "I can care less about your discussion. You ain't no damn admin." Real collaborative(!) Mac Dreamstate (talk) 02:14, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Sonia Baez-Hernandez

Hello PRehse. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Sonia Baez-Hernandez, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. GedUK  12:58, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Boxing MOS take #2

It looks like the flags issue has reached a stalemate (WP:PERENNIAL, perhaps?) and seems to be the main sticking point of the MOS, despite being only a fraction of the whole thing. The only comments on the actual stylistic/format proposals have been given by User:Fallengrademan, and I like some of his suggestions, despite our mutual frustrations towards each other. At the least he is an easy-going soul and willing to keep discussing, unlike our Nyce friend up there with his uplifting and charming attitude. Either way, would you say it's time to put the flags debate to bed—as in, concede and allow them to stay for now—and move on with getting the rest of the MOS cleared? Quite frankly I'm bored to death of what should be a minor aesthetic issue, when there are far more basic details to be ironed out, such as the weight classes and record table formats. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:28, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Mac Dreamstate I think if the RfC were closed now there would be out-cry. Just let it be for now - think of it as a shiny light for some demented cats. Since someone has moved the guidelines you put together into a non-Talk page I think the next step is to merge the two pages I mentioned on your talk page. The issues on the record page (including flags) can be modified as they are resolved.Peter Rehse (talk) 20:44, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Besides the succession box (which I'm still working on), is there anything to be retained from the outdated MOS you pointed out? I've tried a few merges before on articles with less content, but I always seem to get some small things wrong—WP's own merge tutorial is a headache to navigate. And yes, I fully expect some details to still be challenged, such as the use of rowspans or the minimal use of small text. I knew going in that it was a bold move to put those forth, so I won't sweat it too much if they're unpopular enough to get shot down. The absolute main thing I want out of this MOS is to finally get the consistency for weight classes and "lineal"/"champion[ship]"/"title" to be set in stone. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 23:10, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Mac Dreamstate I think all I saw was the succession box. Don't worry about the WP merge tutorial - that procedure is used to generate discussion which we already have. Really I think this is well on its way to being resolved and if there are a few more changes after they are completely posted so be it.Peter Rehse (talk) 23:28, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Succession box done. The whole thing is now about as complete as I can get it without feedback—or opposition—from others. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 17:03, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Mac Dreamstate I changed the WikiProject Style link to the new MOS page. I also closed the Final Notice RFC.Peter Rehse (talk) 17:54, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited William Bezerra, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brazilian. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Oops--deleted text

Sorry, this was mostly certainly unintentional! —Largo Plazo (talk) 23:18, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Boxing guidelines

In view of the two articles you nominated for deletion, I thought it was appropriate to notify you of this discussion I started in the talk section of the relevant project - Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing#Notability guidelines. RonSigPi (talk) 03:58, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

In view your input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing#Notability guidelines I have made a proposal at Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports)#Boxing clarification. Since you gave input at the project page, then I thought I would let you know about the general page. RonSigPi (talk) 00:57, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Kunlun fight

Hello,

I'm not sure that the previous AfD on this article should still prevail for G4 purposes. It appears that the previous consensus was based on their being no or weak sources. I didn't have any difficulty finding a large number of recent sources with some merit, albeit they are mostly non-English-language. I did find this article in particular which I think would tend to significantly help the notability argument if the source is considered reliable for boxing news.

From reading these sources I honestly think that this is a reasonably significant sport franchise which probably is notable, which just happens to suffer from a lack of interest from Western journalists. I briefly considered removing your G4 tag and arguing for a fresh AfD, but I don't feel strongly enough about the topic, confident enough about the quality of the sources I found, or certain enough about the outcome of an AfD to go down that road :) Instead I'm just leaving you this note with my thoughts to consider or disregard as you prefer!

Cheers,

Thparkth (talk) 21:59, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Thparkth The AfD was also based on the quality of references but what really sunk it was the level of unsubstantiated hyperbole. They are not the biggest, bestest kickboxing organisation in the world - far from it. After the AfD the article was persistently recreated in all sorts of imaginary ways and of course speedied each time.Peter Rehse (talk) 22:17, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I was definitely getting that vibe looking at the history of the article(s). As I said, I think the article is technically defensible, but their conduct makes me unmotivated to care. Thparkth (talk) 22:27, 23 December 2015 (UTC)