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. The consensus here is that there is not sufficient reference material to demonstrate notability. If anyone would like to work on this article as a draft, let me know and I will put it in draft space for you. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 16:05, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bryan Battle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Subject is a mixed martial arts fighter. Subject fails GNG as fight announcements and fight results sources are merely routine reports Subject also fails WP:NMMA for not ranked top ten in the world. As present he ranked 131 in welterweight. Cassiopeia talk 04:17, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Martial arts, and South Carolina. Cassiopeia talk 04:17, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Subject won The Ultimate Fighter 29 and after research I can say subject meets WP:GNG with significant independent coverage from multiple sources such as MMA Junkie, MMA Fighting, MMA Mania, Yahoo!, Sportskeeda, B.J. Penn, North State Journal, The Charlotte Observer and WCNC-TV. Lethweimaster (talk) 11:04, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note to win TUF 29 is not a qualify for GNG nor NMMA. And not sources url are given. Note: Yahoo is not a source where we need to have original independent, reliable source and Sportkeeda is not are reliable sources and some of the articles in the site are written by fans - see "SportsKeeda.com is owned by the fans. Yes, you read it right; We have placed the control of the website right in hands of the fans. As a fan,, you are invited to write an article, comment on articles and even do interviews wiht sporting celebrities. You cannot only just create your own content; you can easily shere it via social media such as Facebook, Orkut and Twitter. Today, we live in the digital age and there is no digital sport site in India which has handed over control to the user" - see source here.
• Comment Cassiopeia I know TUF does not constitute notability, GNG is number 1. I just mentioned it because fans may want to read about the subject because of this accomplishment and it's the reason why he initially gets so much coverage. I listed 9 sources, even if you remove Yahoo and Sportskeeda, subject seems to have plenty of significant independent coverage to meet WP:GNG. Lethweimaster (talk) 08:09, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Per Lethwimaster also fighter have 3 or more bouts in UFC also with his recent win he is more then enough notable.DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 01:30, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Commment, 3 or more bout in UFC does not meet NMMA or GNG. Cassiopeia talk 01:33, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I won't change my vote. Period. DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 01:34, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:45, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Not close to meeting WP:NMMA. Fight announcements, fight results, and MMA databases are not enough to meet WP:GNG. The number of UFC fights is not an indicator of notability. Papaursa (talk) 03:18, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  WP:MMA is not needed if subject meets GNG. Subject meets GNG with significant in dept coverage from different sources. WCNC-TV[1], The Charlotte Observer [2], MMA Junkie [3]. Lethweimaster (talk) 20:42, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The first source is a local news article about him winning the Ultimate Fighter, the second is a local news report on a victory, and the third is an interview. Fight results and interviews do not generally constitute significant coverage. Papaursa (talk) 21:07, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Draftify I think this is a case of WP:TOOSOON Nswix (talk) 13:55, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - It seems a thoroughly comprehensive and well-researched article. Wafflesvarog (talk) 20:33, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As this is your first AfD, you might want to familiarize yourself with WP policies such as WP:N. Editors often disagree, and even change their minds, so I would be interested in hearing your specific reasons for saying this subject is WP notable. Thank you. Papaursa (talk) 00:48, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify Also think this is a case of WP:TOOSOON HeinzMaster (talk) 06:29, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:08, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify seems ok. Does seem like TOOSOON, likely in another year they'll hit it big. NO pun intended. Oaktree b (talk) 13:32, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Meets WP:GNP fighter is enough notable espically with his latest win also additional source has been added.DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 14:01, 16 June 2023 (UTC)(striking duplicate vote)[reply]

Please strike one of your !votes. JoelleJay (talk) 18:24, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, per Papaursa. If he's notable in the future this can be undeleted or a new article can be created, but as it stands now he fails GNG. JoelleJay (talk) 18:22, 16 June 2023 (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.