Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mixed martial arts
| This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Mixed martial arts and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
Archives (index): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13Auto-archiving period: 30 days  |
 | This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
 | WikiProject Mixed martial arts was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 13 May 2013. |
Dricus du Plessis page vandalism
[edit]Someone vandalized his page on the fighter records against Adesanya and Whittaker today at 12:35 UTC, but the page is semiprotected and I can't revert Editor976's vandalism. Galvao1090 (talk) 13:53, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
- Fixed, thanks. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 14:23, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
Not notable on his MMA record alone, but I still would want it properly presented. Hyperbolick (talk) 09:52, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
MF Boxing
[edit]I know this isnt a boxing Wikipedia but if you can i would like to ask some help.
Im holding discusions about MF boxing at Talk:KSI. The matches are officially exhibition matches but are listed as profesional matches. There are lot of sockpuppets involved and only a few other accounts seems to be a real accounts working on the page. If you guys could, i would like to hear your opinion.
I have often seen people refer to the MF Boxers as real boxers and use their records on wikipedia as prove of their professional record. Of course i believe this is wrong and it isnt reconized as such by any major record holder or boxing organization. I feel like it discredits the people who go through the extra effort to get their fights to be pro, even guys like Jake Paul who actually went through the difficulty of getting all his fights to be professional.
My suggestion is to either split them into MF-Boxing or exhibition to keep true to the records holders.
Thank you for reading. Panini03 (talk) 12:37, 12 October 2025 (UTC)
BLPN discussion
[edit]Hi - there is a discussion at Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Inclusion_of_potentially_derogatory_nickname which may be of interest to members of this Wikiproject. Girth Summit (blether) 12:24, 15 October 2025 (UTC)
- Hi again. Further to the above discussion, I have in recent days seen a number of people associated with this Wikiproject make an assertion along the lines of "MMA fighters’ records are sourced from Sherdog". I am trying to get to the bottom of where this impression has come from - I looked at Wikipedia:WikiProject Mixed martial arts/sources, but can't see anything about it there. Can anyone point me towards any discussion that established this practice, or anywhere it is recorded? I'll put my cards on the table - at this moment in time I do not believe that such a practice would be compliant with overriding policies, but I would like to look into it from the beginning. My aim is to try and avoid any unnecessary blocks of people who are doing what they think is right. Girth Summit (blether) 15:25, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
- Here is a discussion about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mixed_martial_arts/Archive_12#The_Sherdog_requirement --Killashaw (talk) 18:01, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for that, Killashaw. It doesn't quite get me to the point where I understand where the original notion that 'Sherdog must be used' came from, but at least I can now see that it has been pointed out already that any such notion is wrong. It is unfortunate that some people are still perpetuating the idea, and I want to do whatever I can to disabuse people of the idea so that we don't have any more unfortunate incidents where someone believes they are doing the right thing by restoring an article to match Sherdog's content, and ends up getting blocked as a result. For the avoidance of doubt, I'll reiterate the current consensus recorded at WP:RSP: Sherdog is adequate as a source for uncontroversial assertions, but it enjoys no special status, and if its content differs from that of 'generally reliable' sources, we should use those sources in preference over Sherdog. Editors who feel differently about Sherdog are welcome to start a new discussion at WP:RSN and try to get consensus for a different position, but the onus is on them to do that. Furthermore, regardless of whether or not Sherdog is regarded as a generally reliable source, there is no rule stating that it must be used for particular information, and this Wikiproject has no mandate or authority to formulate such a rule. From WP:Wikiproject#Function:
WikiProjects are not rule-making organizations, nor can they assert ownership of articles within a specific topic area. WikiProjects have no special rights or privileges compared to other editors and may not impose their preferences on articles.
No Wiki project has the ability to impose sourcing rules on editors, whether or not those editors are members of the project, or 'regulars' in the topic area. The 'rules' for writing about MMA-related subjects are the same as they are for any subject, and when we're talking about an MMA fighter, the policy we really need to abide by above all others is WP:BLP. Sourcing requirements are covered at WP:RS. No editor or group of editors gets to decide that a particular type of assertion has to rely on any specific source across multiple articles. I hope that's clear to everyone. Girth Summit (blether) 11:48, 25 October 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for that, Killashaw. It doesn't quite get me to the point where I understand where the original notion that 'Sherdog must be used' came from, but at least I can now see that it has been pointed out already that any such notion is wrong. It is unfortunate that some people are still perpetuating the idea, and I want to do whatever I can to disabuse people of the idea so that we don't have any more unfortunate incidents where someone believes they are doing the right thing by restoring an article to match Sherdog's content, and ends up getting blocked as a result. For the avoidance of doubt, I'll reiterate the current consensus recorded at WP:RSP: Sherdog is adequate as a source for uncontroversial assertions, but it enjoys no special status, and if its content differs from that of 'generally reliable' sources, we should use those sources in preference over Sherdog. Editors who feel differently about Sherdog are welcome to start a new discussion at WP:RSN and try to get consensus for a different position, but the onus is on them to do that. Furthermore, regardless of whether or not Sherdog is regarded as a generally reliable source, there is no rule stating that it must be used for particular information, and this Wikiproject has no mandate or authority to formulate such a rule. From WP:Wikiproject#Function:
- Here is a discussion about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mixed_martial_arts/Archive_12#The_Sherdog_requirement --Killashaw (talk) 18:01, 22 October 2025 (UTC)