Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nikita Allanov

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. There is a valid debate over the claim of notability, but clearly none of the deleters are persuaded of the case at the conclusion of the discussion. Lakes' final comment is especially telling. -Splash - tk 17:41, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nikita Allanov

Nikita Allanov (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Person does not meet notability requirements ↪Lakes (Talk) 20:26, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

• Delete No non-trivial reliable independent sources, fails WP:BIO. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 20:44, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per the above reasons. Acalamari 22:18, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. Allanov is a top star on the independent circuit (most notably in the National Wrestling Alliance where he has one several regional titles) and has been listed in Pro Wrestling Illustrated's "PWI 500" between 2001-2005 as specified on the article prior to nomination. Among his opponents include UFC champion Dan Severn, himself a former NWA World Heavyweight Champion [1], defeating in a BDW Heavyweight title defence on May 26, 2006. [2] MadMax 01:09, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment He's definitely not a top star in the indy circuit, and being listed in the PWI 500 below top 100 is not notable since the list is based on wrestlers submitting their information, and is not checked. Having wrestled Dan Severn is not notable either. Winning a championship in a non-notable indy company doesn't make him notable. ↪Lakes (Talk) 19:21, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

• Regardess of how credible you believe the PWI 500 to be, Allanov has appeared in a major publication stating he is a top star on the independent circuit (and westlers above 250 are primarily WWE, TNA and international stars). The National Wrestilng Alliance, an organization in which he has won several major titles, is arguably the top independent wrestling promotion in the United States. A defeat over a major professional wrestler, a wrestler whose held the NWA Heavyweight title, is notable. Additionaly the WCW and TNA Heavyweight titles are offshoots of the NWA World Heavyweight title which was formerly recognised by at least one major publication (both prior and during Severn's reign) as a world title. MadMax 18:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

• Comment For non-fans participating in the AFD I'll note that the National Wrestling Alliance is a group of small regional promotions in the USA and not to be confused with TNA Wrestling despite TNA holding the main NWA titles. Also that the defeat of Dan Severn was a worked pro-wrestling match, not an MMA match for which he is famous. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak_Sign 01:33, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. He's wrestled in at least eight US states, and appeared on a Japanese pay-per-view, which elevates him above the average non-notable indepdent circuit wrestler. [3] He has also been featured in several DVD releases. [4], [5] McPhail 19:45, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

• Comment He didn't wrestle on PPV, he appeared on the "Hashimoto in America Special" which aired on 23rd January 2002 on Samurai TV and was not PPV. Appearing on a DVD or two does not make someone notable per Wiki guidelines, otherwise we'd have articles on practically every actor there is which we don't. The primary notability criterion is A person is notable if he or she has been the subject of secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject which at present he fails. I don't consider him meeting any of the Special Cases listed, and even if he did that still needs there to be a good deal of verifiable information available about them, which there isn't. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 19:54, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

• He's appeared on at least half a dozen DVDs released by a variety of publishers, not "a DVD or two". He was also the subject of an article by the Piitsburgh Tribunal Review. McPhail 20:13, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

• Comment Are these DVDs available from major retailers, or are they distributed by and large by the promotion who produced them or from wrestling retailers like Highspots? Also he wasn't "the subject" of the article at all, it's trivial coverage of him at best. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 21:16, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

• Pro Wrestling Illustrated is a major publication in the United States of which Allanov has been the subject of and consitutes as a secondary sources that is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject. PWI is mentioned in wrestlers biographies throughout Wikipedia, specifically PWI Years. MadMax 18:32, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

As stated above, his PWI coverage was based on him sending his own information in, which isn't subsequently checked and thus is not a reliable source. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 19:18, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

While the editors encourage submissions from the numerous indepedendent promotions operating both in the United States and internationally, PWI clearly states By ranking a wrestler in a position above another wrestler, we are not saying that the higher-ranked wrestler is nessessarily better or that he would beat the lower-ranked wrestler. Among the points taken into account are the wrestler's pound-for-pound abilities and how active he was for the year. ("PWI 500." Pro Wrestling Illustrated Dec. 1998. [pg. 39])

There is nothing to suggest that PWI does not check its entries nor that it is an unreliable source. There is no proof that wrestlers are included simply by information sent by wrestlers or promoters and that the rankings themselves are based on the editors opinions themselves. The point is that a major US publication states that Allanov is a top wrestler in North America and has been listed as such on three other occasions. MadMax 00:34, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Even if those ranks were really valid, being number 362 in 2005 wouldn't make him notable. ↪Lakes (Talk) 16:46, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

So you've clearly admitted PWI is written in a kayfabe style, and yet somehow it's still a reliable source? Are you aware that for many years the interviews published in the magazine were completely made up, and possibly still are? I suggest you also look at the PWI FAQ page, which shows its lack of editorial policy. Also none of the information currently in the article is attributed to PWI in the first place. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 16:56, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

First if the rankings need to cited then a reference tag is nessessary not nominating an article for deletion. Second, an interview isn't being cited here. Nowhere in their guidelines in the PWI 500 mentioned. Your opinion is that the magazine simply prints whatever information they get from independent wrestlers, the editors say otherwise. I'm not going to debate the merits of PWI, however I do believe it's extremely shortsighted to disregard its publication as unreliable. The PWI almanac for example is considered an extremly valuble resource. Similarly almost every major wrestler has an award or ranking using the PWI 500 or Years, should these be removed as well ? Your completely overlooking the fact that a major publication printed such a wrestler as a top competitor in the independent circuit. How is this any different from the Wrestling Observer or any other wrestling newsletter ? MadMax 02:55, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I would say that the very fact PWI is written in a kayfabe style indicates that wrestlers don't appear on the PWI 500 through having excellent matches, they appear on it due to visibility, title "wins" and higher profile matches, i.e. notability (though there was the time they went crazy in 1997 and gave the Number 1 wrestler award to Dean Malenko). ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak_Sign 03:03, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Where is it stated that he's a top competitor in the independent circuit? You so far haven't provided any indication that that is true. ↪Lakes (Talk) 11:57, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Delete I don't think he meets any of the general criteria of WP:BIO and am unconvinced by his level of contribution to the wrestling scene. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 14:35, 8 April 2007 (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.