Talk:Sherdog

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sherdog article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

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

Mixed martial arts

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mixed martial arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mixed martial arts concepts, events, and biographies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Mixed martial artsWikipedia:WikiProject Mixed martial artsTemplate:WikiProject Mixed martial artsmixed martial arts articles

Websites: Computing

	This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Article created

I created this page because it is referenced in pretty much every mixed martial arts article, so I felt it deserved its own page. Feel free to disagree. I am in no way affiliated with the website itself.Alex Klotz 04:01, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Unreferenced' tag

I have no clue what made this "unreferenced" considereing the link to the site is pretty self explanatory referencing/citation wise.Rhythmic01 01:00, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article requires citations from reliable sources that prove its notability. In its current form, the article fails WP:WEB --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 01:19, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notablity huh? I have notablity. It is the biggest Mixed martial arts site out there. Google sherdog and see how many hits you get.

Check the bigboards rank for its forum which is the best ranked forum for Mixed martial arts

http://www.big-boards.com/highlight/160/1/

Ranked 214, Best any MMA forum has.

Alexia rank http://www.alexa.com/search?q=www.sherdog.com 3,804 That even beats out UFCs own website which sits at 3,999. Its forum has over 60k registered members source the fourms itself have the member number listed http://www.sherdog.net/forums/

It is notable. Before UFC.com got its own news division they worked very closly with sherdog, Sherdogs editor in chief was featured on WFAs showtime promotional special.

Rhythmic01 06:00, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not myself doubting that it's notable - I did the Google search myself and saw all the hits. I'm only indicating that, in its current form, the article doesn't prove it. Check out WP:WEB for notability guidelines regarding websites and the type of proof that this article is lacking. Particularly I think some reviews or other sources of information from reliable sources would help. Some other applicable Wikipedia guidelines are WP:V (Verification) and WP:CITE (citation). --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 12:58, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When I created the article, I thought it was notable because pretty much every single article about an MMA fighter has a reference to sherdog. I'm not sure how to prove that in the article, though.Alex Klotz 20:57, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Surely there must be some article in a reliable source that discusses Sherdog? If so, that can be used for cited information, helping this article meet WP:V. For your convenience, here's a list of applicable guidelines/policies:

Hope this helps --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 00:45, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AbsolutDan, I think you have misinterpreted the policies. Notability does not need to be proven in the article, it only needs to be proven in AfD. Notability must be merely asserted if it is to avoid speedy deletion (WP:CSD). Since deletion is not being considered, the debate is moot. What needs to be verified and cited is the contents of the article, and since for the most part the statements in this stub are obviously true (one quick visit to sherdog.com pretty much will confirm most of the article), I don't see what sourcing will add, except for footnotes punctuating every sentence. hateless 03:42, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From WP:WEB: "The article itself must provide proof that its subject meets one of these criteria via inlined links or a "Reference" or "External link" section." This article is lacking references that prove it meets the criteria. The statement "Sherdog's message boards are ranked in the top 50 on the internet with over 40,000 registered members" is not obviously true, and the site itself should not be used as a source for such a statement, as any website could make such a claim if that were the case. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 04:37, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Forbes just mentioned sherdog.com in an article about the UFC along with its editor Josh Gross. Who has also been shown in WFAs showtime preppv-show giving his outlook on their july ppv with his name and title of Sherdog.com Editor. http://www.forbes.com/2006/10/05/sports-martial-arts_tech_media_cx_rs_1005fight.html?partner=yahootix Forbes even mentions it is the biggest combat sport website.Rhythmic01 23:52, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

K-1 uses sherdogs fightfinder for its own site and gives credit to it. http://www.k-1usa.net/docs/fighters/fightfinder.asp?fighterID=15 http://www.forrestgriffin.net/news/news_4.html http://www.bjj.eu.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=111&Itemid= http://www.xillent.com/docs/projects/portfolio_sherdog.asp Rhythmic01 07:28, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Forums + Page in General

Is it necessary to say how their forums rank? What is the ranking based off of? Is the information relevant? In my opinion the sentence about it being ranked 50 should be removed. Also, I find an article about Sherdog in general to be a good idea since it's fighter data is widely regarded as the most complete compilation. Thesaddestday 02:55, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, the new post about the forums sounds unnecessary, and the forums listed as an external link should be enough. I'm not convinced a paragraph for the forums should be in the article. Other thoughts? Thesaddestday 07:39, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ESPN

Sherdog is now linked to from ESPN, so that's a pretty big deal —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.157.106.11 (talk • contribs)

sherdog is the shit and the best site for MMA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.127.223.98 (talk) 19:49, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ranks

I think it would be great if someone could include the current ranks in the different weight classes --Vik.sanchez (talk) 15:11, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unbiased

This article seems more like a promotion then a neutral and unbiased wikiarticle, anyone agree? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.215.94.20 (talk) 20:04, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhat, the history section definitely could be improved. If no one else takes a stab at it now I'll try to do something in the near future. --aktsu ^(t / c) 20:18, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone add something about the adversarial relationship between Sherdog (the entity not the individual) and Dana White the UFC president? I know that they have problems getting their reporters credentialed for UFC events. The UFC being the premier MMA organization I think this is notable. --Ason Abdullah (talk) 00:10, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ref Improve + Notability

The refs on this article need improving, and more needs to be done to show the notability, at the moment there is only one ref to anything like significant coverage (the one from FIGHT! Magazine) but as that is from an organisation without it's own WP article it is hard to judge if it is both a WP:RS and how independent it is from Sherdog as the site appears to carry a lot of Sherdog content. Other refs included the statement "the country's largest Web site devoted to mixed martial arts" in the context of quoting a member of staff, however it is unclear what the source of that claim is and is it backed up. Mt king ^(edits) 23:31, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Added a bit, to address the impartiality issue.

Hope that helps.

D — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.67.56 (talk) 14:09, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

63.139.86.3 (talk)‎ has the same zip code as crave online (90056). Not sure why he is editing for them and turning the page into an infomercial...

How reliable is Sherdog really?

I was just glazing over Volk Han's entry and inspired by user:Jacee215, I've begin to wonder about legitimacy of Sherdog and its MMA records. While Magomedkhan "Volk Han" Gamzatkhanov is certainly is a capable Martial Artist, he has mostly amassed his wins from Fighting Network Rings, which was known as a professional wrestling company advocating Shoot-style pro wrestling prior to changing to MMA in 1995. It is also not certain if RINGS was fully legitimate after 1995. There are people people who feel stuff from 1995 onwards is "worked" and can point when the fakeness in the fight occurs. Yet Sherdog has his 1995 onwards career in there: [1]
What's more, it was promoted by known pro wrestler Akira Maeda, who even has MMA stats in Sherdog as well. While it may seem like this is a "Fighting Network Rings" problem (as I have no other kayfabe or fixed fights to think of), it does make me question why would they have stats of *potential* fake fighters there? --TrickShotFinn (talk) 17:04, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reliability was discussed in October 2020 on the reliable sources noticeboard; see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 318#Sherdog.com. – wbm1058 (talk) 16:09, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]