Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sonika Kaliraman

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 no consensus. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 12:14, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sonika Kaliraman

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

Non-notable wrestler - participant on some reality show does not demonstrate notability either. Her sister was just AfD'd for similar reasons (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deepika Kaliraman) Peter Rehse (talk) 15:04, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 15:04, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Just have a look at her official profile, which is provided by the United World Wrestling. She had represented India for more than one decade in the top international tournaments, which include the Senior/Junior World Wrestling Championships, Asian Games, Asian Wrestling Championships, etc. In fact, she was the 2000 Asian Junior Champion. She had also reached to the bronze medal bout of the 2006 Asian Games – click here. At the national level, she made multiple podium finishes in the National Championships, e.g. 2001, 2003, 2008, 2009, etc. I guess that is more that enough to satisfy WP:NSPORT.

She is even further special as she was the first Indian female wrestler. And the struggle of hers and her father Chandgi Ram to introduce women's wrestling in India is even highlighted by the United World Wrestling - click here. She was the first one to win India's highest women's wrestling title – Bharat Kesari. She has also signed up to become the first pro female wrestler from India.

Finally, her post-retirement career in TV – where she participated in the country's top reality shows like Fear Factor: Khatron Ke Khiladi — 1, Bigg Boss — 2 & Zor Ka Jhatka: Total Wipeout — 3 – is in itself sufficient to satisfy the WP:GNG. But that isn't even required. - NitinMlk (talk) 07:47, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:47, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment As an adult she never came close to winning a match at a world championship, finishing near the bottom at both events. She has no medals in a significant international competition. The article on her and her sisters looks like good coverage. If other sources can be found, WP:GNG might be met. I'm not inclined to say that appearing on reality TV shows is enough to show notability, though others may disagree. Papaursa (talk) 04:18, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Sports_personalities states that an "athlete is presumed to be notable if the person has actively participated in a major amateur or professional competition or won a significant honor....". So, it clearly states that the long-term participation in the major competitions is enough to satisfy the WP:NSPORT. And the concerned amateur wrestler has represented her country in the top amateur wrestling events for more than one decade. I guess that's 'active' enough. Secondly, as far as WP:GNG is concerned, there are enough reliable independent sources in the English and the other languages, e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, etc. But I guess the WP:GNG will come into picture if she fails the WP:NSPORT, which doesn't seem to be the case here. - NitinMlk (talk) 09:39, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You should add these sources to the article. The presumption of notability does not guarantee notability. WP guidelines still say reliable sources are needed. Because of the number of organizations, events, and divisions simply competing at a martial arts world championship has not always been sufficient to show notability. Papaursa (talk) 16:06, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Papaursa, there's not necessarily a need to add the sources to the article to pass AfD. Please see WP:NEXIST. Fieari (talk) 00:35, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's not about passing the AfD, it's about improving the article. Papaursa (talk) 19:40, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I believe that NitinMlk has provided enough coverage to show WP:GNG is met. It's still debatable whether she's notable for her wrestling alone. Even one of the sources provided [1] says she has accomplished nothing at the international level (at least according to my computer translation). However GNG trumps any SNG. Papaursa (talk) 16:06, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 19:45, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:NEXIST and NitinMlk's sources, above. Fieari (talk) 00:35, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. when an arguement for 1notability has to use something as vague as "participated in ", then its likely thee is not substantial notability. It's accepted that Jr. league victories in any sport do not count, and that 'sall the accomplishments. DGG ( talk ) 00:15, 23 September 2016 (UTC) ß[reply]

It's not some far-fetched argument – it's the relevant wiki policy. At present, unlike many other Olympic sports, amateur wrestling doesn't have separate notability criteria – check at WP:ATH. So, only alternative left here is to use the Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Sports_personalities, which the subject meets easily. In any case, to meet the WP:GNG, there's more than enough coverage of her in the third-party reliable sources. BTW, what's vague about the term "participated in"? At least in the case of sports tournaments, its meaning is crystal clear. - NitinMlk (talk) 08:08, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.