Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nisse Sauerland

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Consensus is to delete the articles on Nisse and Kalle, while keeping the article on Wilfried Sauerland Davewild (talk) 14:03, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Nisse Sauerland

Nisse Sauerland (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable boxing promoter. Recently created addition to brother and father articles all of which suffer from the same problem. The company which they apparently own was deleted on A7 grounds - notability not established. The only reference in the article is to the companies website - his name does come up on searches but mainly has being someone's promoter which does not establish his own notability. Fails WP:GNG.Peter Rehse (talk) 10:50, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 10:50, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

• Comment I am seriously considering adding Kalle Sauerland (brother) and Wilfried Sauerland (father) to this debate but that depends on initial response to this one. There is a single reasonable source in the Kalle Sauerland article but that is about Wilfried Sauerland which does not have that reference in the article.Peter Rehse (talk) 11:02, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
• Comment If any of these three are notable, it's Wilfried. There is at least one significant source on him (reliability unknown) and he was inducted into the IBHOF. Normally we ignore martial arts halls of fame, but this is far more significant and independent than most. Its own article may be of uncertain WP notability, but many in the boxing community consider it significant. I didn't see any significant coverage on Nisse or Kalle, although I only did a quick search and focused on sources in English. Papaursa (talk) 13:57, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:10, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:10, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages because of the reasoning above although, also by the reasoning above, am inclined to Keep the Wilfried Sauerland article if significant sources can be found:

Wilfried Sauerland (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Kalle Sauerland (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Peter Rehse (talk) 12:40, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Speedy Keep This should not have made it up to AFD. The amount of news of him as a promoter on google is astounding [1]. He is a confirmed international promoter. [2] CrazyAces489 (talk) 18:28, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

A fight promoter who promotes fights is not automatically notable, any more than anybody else is notable simply for doing their job.

• Keep Wilfried, Delete Kalle and Nisse Except for Wilfried, the others lack significant independent coverage. Being mentioned as promoting a fighter or fight card is just doing one's job and are passing mentions.Mdtemp (talk) 15:26, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Keep but Improve the subject is notable and interesting Chunlinc (talk) 16:31, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Chunlinc, I'd like you welcome you to Wikipedia. I would also like to recommend some pages you should become familiar with. The general notability guidelines can be found at WP:GNG, a description of what makes a source reliable is at WP:RS, and a list of arguments to avoid at deletion discussions can be found at WP:ATA. Wikipedia notability requires significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Merely liking something or claiming it's interesting or notable is not sufficient for an article to be deemed notable--it must have the necessary independent coverage. Papaursa (talk) 18:03, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

• Weak Keep on Wilfried, Delete Nisse and Kalle I don't see the significant coverage required to show the first two are notable. Their coverage seems to be passing mentions and routine sports coverage with independence sometimes also being an issue. I think Wilfried is close, so I'm going with keep. Papaursa (talk) 18:03, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ― Padenton|✉   21:33, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 04:07, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

• Delete - only reference is subject's own website. May be self-promotion.--Rpclod (talk) 04:41, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.