Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jorge Gracie

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 12:12, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jorge Gracie

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

Only claims to notability appear to be that he's part of the Gracie family and has a high rank, but neither of these are enough to show notability. The article's only sources just give passing mentions of him. Mdtemp (talk) 18:01, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 20:08, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:33, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:33, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – I would contend that this particular rank does lend credence to his notability; he is one of only 5 individuals who have - and can ever have - the 10th degree red belt, the highest rank in BJJ. While most of the records do seem rather sparse from that time period the article does seem to suggest he was as accomplished at professional fighting as his brother Hélio. Finally, while the main citiation only contains about a paragraphs worth of content about Jorge, it contains a similar amount of content for much more well-known figures, such as Carlos and Hélio, suggesting more that the author was seeking overall brevity rather than creating section length as any particular reflection of the importance of those being referenced. Buddy23Lee (talk) 20:45, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Additionally, this bio from BJJHeroes could be used to add much more substantive and detailed content to this currently stubby article. Buddy23Lee (talk) 20:59, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am not convinced by the belt argument--the early Gracies gave themselves 10th degrees and declared no one else can ever attain that ranking. That sounds more like protecting a family business than a comment on notability. As for BJJHeroes, I am not sure that is either reliable or independent as a source. Even that source lists nothing for Jorge Gracie under "Accomplishments". BJJHeroes also avoids mentioning his loss to Euclydes Hatem, which is the only thing I can find Jorge mentioned for in independent sources (except for passing mentions in Gracie family histories, which don't show notability). Papaursa (talk) 18:02, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it would have been a more heartwarming story if Jorge and the other Gracies had been awarded red belts through crowd sourcing or some similarly free and democratic process, but it still doesn't change the fact that the man is officially recognized by the overwhelmingly predominant BJJ regulatory agency in North America as the co-highest ranking jiu-jitsoka in the entire world. And while you're certainly right that BJJheroes is no Encyclopedia Britannica, it still remains one of the few highly-detailed founts of BJJ biographical info to be found online, even if it's more about breadth than depth. In fact, you'd be hard pressed to find a bio article on a notable jiu-jitsoka here (on the wiki) that doesn't use it as a source. Good find on the match against Euclydes Hatem - seems like yet another fact supporting notability and inclusion! :) Buddy23Lee (talk) 23:55, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The father gives himself and his four sons a rank and declares no one else can ever have those ranks. That's not an indication of notability, it's an indication of nepotism. I wouldn't claim losing his only sourced fight boosts his notability. I haven't voted in the hope that you (or someone else) can provide some good independent reliable sources to support his claim. Papaursa (talk) 02:18, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In due respect Papaursa, you seem to have somewhat mistaken understanding of the particular history here. The red and similarly fancy belts are a relatively recent creation and have nothing to do with the Gracie brothers' father, Gastão Sr. Up through the 1950's and 60's they only had a system of three belts - white, light blue, and dark blue. The implementation of the current system appears to have been put into place sometime in the later 20th century, though I'll be damned if I can find the exact date. Also, contrary to what you've been alleging, I had read somewhere that Helio himself was somewhat upset with having to start wearing a red belt, giving the impression it was more a forced organizational change and not a personal one. Be that as it may (or not), it still doesn't change the widespread recognition of Jorge Gracie as a notable fighter of his day and one of the early pioneers of BJJ, regardless of what color or other specialness his belt is. Buddy23Lee (talk) 05:48, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since the Gracies have always controlled BJJ the belts are still about family and notability is not inherited. I'd rather focus on the notability of Jorge. If he's that significant to BJJ it shouldn't be hard to find some independent reliable coverage of him--some documentation to support the claims he traveled all over Brazil defeating everyone (besides Gracie proclamations). This would be the "widespread recognition" you describe. Papaursa (talk) 14:19, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think we can all get behind that idea. The one final caveat I'd caution is to rely entirely upon that fighting career for notabily, as if he were a proto-MMA fighter from a bygone time before fantastic record keeping. I still submit the given rank really is important - Not in and of itself. Not by how he may have or may not have received it - But as a reflection of his perceived contribution to what would later be formalized as modern Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. Perhaps it is and was nepotistic, ethnocentric, xenophobic and every other bad thing you might allege that Carlos chose his brothers as his early instructors and partners in establishing his academy and spreading the good word (of BJJ). But I have little doubt that were someone else to have filled Jorge's shoes, so to speak, and helped to spread early BJJ as he did, he would have been awarded similarly high honors as well. Buddy23Lee (talk) 19:37, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:34, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment To his credit, Buddy23Lee has added some sources to this article. However, I'm still having some problems seeing the coverage required to meet WP:GNG because there's a lack of significant coverage reliable independent sources. Let's look at the 10 sources: Number 1 is from a Gracie school, 2 is the IBJJF listing showing Jorge's rank, 3 is a black belt article on the Gracie family history where he merits a paragraph and is the 19th Gracie listed, 4 is the BJJ Heroes biography listing his achievements as "N/A", 5 appears to be a passing mention, 6 mentions him solely in the context of refusing a prearranged fight, 7 is a self-published book, 8 is a fight announcement, 9 is for an MMA Hall of Fame where anyone can nominate and people are welcome to vote on Facebook and Twitter (martial arts HOFs are not considered indicators of notability), and 10 is a passing mention from a non-independent source on Helio's 100th birthday. I'm sorry but I don't consider this enough to show he meets GNG. I haven't voted to delete the article because, despite what I feel is a lack of sources, the Gracie mystique/record makes it difficult to vote to remove the article. Papaursa (talk) 18:23, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Papaursa, in due respect; you're a tough crowd, and I love you for that. :) We both agree that finding rigorous online citations (or even book sourced ones) that approximate something akin to a Washington Post feature on this long dead fighter or memoir that at one time approached the best sellers list would and should be the aspiration here. Evidently however, no superlative sources are likely to be found at this jucture - I simply added what I could, in the time that I could - to lend more credence to the idea that the article's subject is indeed notable. Since our inclusionist/deletionist philosophies always seem as intractable as the current Isreali/Palistine conflict, let us now leave this matter to the ostensibly forthcoming other AfD editors to decide this article's fate. I believe wikipedia can and should be a proper respository for those seeking information regarding the original Gracie brothers and you, alternatively, do not think this article meets or exceeds our robust standards. Fair enough; surely consensus will prevail, whatever consensus that might be... Buddy23Lee (talk) 23:41, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 18:02, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete You'd think there'd be plenty of coverage of him, but I don't see it. Lacks reliable independent and significant coverage.204.126.132.231 (talk) 19:38, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No changes have been made to the article since September 2, so I am going to vote in accordance with my comments above. I do not believe it's been shown that he meets WP:GNG. Papaursa (talk) 00:23, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Again, our inclusionist/deletionist philosophies will likely never come to an accord on this issue, but please, let's be reasonable here; its more than clear he meets or exceeds a simple WP:BASIC. The man has an independent and, insofar as I can tell, highly rated book significantly featuring his deeds (as one reviewer put it "In Choque, it is evident by the sheer number of fights (fixed or otherwise) that George Gracie seemed to have an illustrious career as a ring fighter.") on top of the BJJ heroes bio and the distinctly reputable Black Belt Magazine article. Yes, it was but a paragraph, but that still holds quite a bit of significance of weight toward notability in totality with the panoply of other citations. Again, as I mentioned before, no citation sort of a major expose in a major publication is like to dissuade you of your stance and I can respect that. My greater fear is that any legitimate nobility of this bygone prize fighter will suffer discrimination due to the time period of his accomplishments (well, WELL before systematic MMA/BJJ record keeping) and the anglocentric nature of this wiki in general as it hobbles a man who lived his entire life in Brazil speaking only português. Had he been born post-1980 and won a handful of gold medals at some IBJJF sanctioned tournament all this time and effort would have clearly been spared. Finally, the only reason this article has yet to have been updated since the September 2 was that I assumed it was becoming redundantly evident this man met the basic criteria. If you truly believe this to not be the case, perhaps then you and the (also my friend) Mdtemp should adhere to your principles and list Carlos Gracie, the official founder of modern BJJ up for deletion, now that Jorge literally possesses twice the citations, rivaling in quality as well as that quantity. I've always believed that this wiki should be a place for those seeking knowledge to come, if only to find a stubby article on a bygone fighter with always improvable sources, as opposed to the alternative of sheer nothingness. I mean Christ, by your own rigorous standards, perhaps you should nominate Christ himself to be deleted. He seems just as liable to exaggeration in his familial claims and the sources coming from his time period our often dubious at best! (you know I love you Paparusa :) Buddy23Lee (talk) 21:09, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Significant coverage in many sources is considered by some to be the founder of BJJ. I could understand deleting this article Kyra Gracie but he was the only fighter.

http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2012/1/2/2675608/mma-origins-carlson-gracie-adapts-jiu-jitsu-to-vale-tudo

http://www.bjjheroes.com/bjj-fighters/george-gracie-facts-and-bio

http://www.bjjee.com/articles/top-10-most-controversial-team-switchers-in-jiu-jitsu-history/

http://www.cagepotato.com/the-top-10-gracies-of-all-time/

http://www.virginiatkd.com/wp-content/uploads/History-of-BJJ1.pdf

http://philosophycommons.typepad.com/the_grumpy_grappler/2014/06/deconstructing-the-gracie-mythology-part-2.html

http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2009/1/10/710938/mma-history-xviii-the-loss

http://www.thearenamma.com/red-belt-earned-honor/

CrazyAces489 (talk) 11:52, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It would help if some of these sources could make their way into the article especially the non-primary ones. One of the big issues is that every Gracie and his dog has an article and not necessarily because they are notable. The term walled garden comes to mind and no - just being a Gracie does not confer notability. I am still holding off my opinion on Jorge - but I do understand both the need for clear references and the difficulty in finding them from an era that was pre-internet. It has to be demonstrated that Jorge was key to the development of BJJ.Peter Rehse (talk) 14:43, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Jorge participated in the first organized BJJ event. He had the first undefeated run. He was for a period the only fighter in the Gracie clan. He set up a number of schools in different areas of Brazil. All of this should show that he was key in the development of BJJ. CrazyAces489 (talk) 05:29, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't think (in at least in Jorge's case) it would end up a walled garden anymore than any other notable fighter. He can be written into the historical aspects of the main BJJ article and linked to any and all notable fighters he fought. Honestly, I'd be more than willing to expand the article and add those above sources and more but I've been waiting to see if the article would be deleted or not. Nothing sucks more than trying to put in all the time and effort only to have the article relegated to the trashbin. :\ Buddy23Lee (talk) 22:30, 19 September 2014 (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.