Talk:Conor McGregor/Archive 2

Conor McGregor's Height Should be 5'11" and Certainly Not 5'8"

There's a recorded footage of Conor McGregor, where he was measured by a UFC official and his barefoot height was found as 5 ft 11 in. This is a 1st degree proof and it's very rare to have such a strong evidence for an individual height. It overrules any claims made by anyone including Conor McGregor himself.

A few user accounts which were probably made by the same people who constantly edit the article and Conor McGregor's on-page listed height to 5 ft 8 in and gives an irrelevant website called sherdog.com as the source. In truth there are 5 reputable sources in the order of strength of evidence:

• 1. There's a recorded footage of his height getting measured by a UFC official as 5'11".
• 2. UFC listed his height as 5'11" in the first few fights of his UFC career.(Link to copyvio removed. GirthSummit _(blether) 14:37, 10 October 2020 (UTC) )(Updated the link with the official BT Sport video replay of the fight. BT Sport is one of the licensed publishers of the UFC content in Europe. 90 seconds into it, the UFC infocard for McGregor is seen and it listed his height as 5'11".)Lordpermaximum (talk) 16:58, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
• 3. His coach John Kavanagh claimed McGregor's height was 5'10" in 2016.
• 4. McGregor himself claimed he was 5'9" in 2014.
• 5. Currently, the UFC and the official UFC website - ufc.com - list his height as 5 ft 9 in.

Conor McGregor is a celebrity and a polarizing figure. These kind of individuals who are constantly on the media evoke personal feelings toward them and there's a significant chance that these editors (Cassiopeia, NEDOCHAN, Squared.Circle.Boxing) who try to downgrade his height has potential dislike towards him and that's why they use some obscure 3rd party site as the source for his height instead of using an actual recorded footage or UFC listing as the source. They reverted my edits constantly by giving that site as the source and Squared.Circle.Boxing reverted my last edit because of some potential copyright violation although it's pretty obvious TheMacLife who is the publisher of the linked video is a licensed media member of the UFC material. Cassiopeia refers to Wikipedia:MMA guideline but that project guideline does not force users to use sherdog.com as the source for fighter heights or profiles and that guideline cannot conflict with Wikipedia's main principles of verifiability, reliability and editors' moderation rights.

I suspect there's a potential organized sneaky vandalism going on here. Lordpermaximum (talk) 19:36, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

WP:ASPERSIONS. That will be the extent of my input. Toodlepip. – ².O.^Boxing 19:32, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

WP:ASPERSIONS has nothing to do with the subject and I only shared my suspicion for your hard to explain actions. I did not make any claims. If you have anything to offer about the subject, please feel free to contribute. Lordpermaximum (talk) 19:40, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't know whether McGregor is 5'8, 5'9, 5'10, or 5'11, but we go by what the sources say. When there are six different citations available listing four different heights, then I'm not sure what the answer is. You are correct that no one site has more weight than another site just because a dead wikiproject makes such an assertion; and there is absolutely no basis for claiming "Potential copyright violation", because it's YouTube. One thing, though - don't edit war on the article page over it, discuss it here instead. If you edit war, you'll just end up blocked for breaching the 3RR rule. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 19:47, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Like I pointed out before, a recorded footage of someone getting measured by an official is the strongest evidence anyone can have for such a thing. It should have the highest weight. Then comes the UFC - which is a sports organization and known for measuring and comparing athlete attributes before competitions and also the organization where Conor McGregor participates and earn a living - and its official listings. Then comes individual (the fighter and the coach) claims. A 3rd party site that has nothing to do with the person in question should not have any weight at all. Lordpermaximum (talk) 19:59, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

I would agree with your assessment. Let's see what the other editors say, too, though. If they don't respond, I'm happy to reinstate your edit. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 22:37, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

YouTube is not a reliable source. Sherdog is and it has information on all notable fighters regardless of their promotion or whether they're active. Please see Dan Henderson for an example. There is not a single reliable source that lists him at 511. NEDOCHAN (talk) 08:41, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

• 1. The actual recorded footage of him getting measured by an UFC official is the most reliable source there is. You can't have any better supporting evidence. Content publisher YouTube has nothing to do with it.
• 2. No, sherdog is not a reliable source. It's not even a weak source. Check Proof by assertion for what you're doing. Who stops me from creating a website to list people's heights according to my wishes and make a couple of my friends agree with me to use it as a source for all MMA related content from now on in a wikiproject? I have nothing to do with those people and sherdog has nothing to do with MMA fighters.
• 3. I can understand not being able to find a height measurement footage like that before but not using the actual UFC site as the source for fighters that compete in its competitions in the first place is very suspicious.
• 4. What you're doing is against the core ideology of Wikipedia and WP:V along with WP:RS. Lordpermaximum (talk) 13:06, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello,

1. For all MMA pages in Wikipedia, we use Sherdog.com as the source in the fighter fight table and the infobox unless those parameters are not found on Sherdog MMA fighter profile pages or new content such as "fighting out of" / "Team" as the fighter move to another city or fight team. For such cases, we will add the content and support them with source.

1. Sherdog.com is the largest and most comprehensive MMA fighter database in the world follow by Tapology then Fight Matrix. We use Sherdog as for the reason just stated. Most sport fans would not heard about any Sherdog and few casual fans might know it as well. Sherdog is extremely well-known by all MMA fans who follows MMA for years/closely just as most people have not heard about Boxrec (Boxer database) if they only watch a few heavyweight title bouts a year or know about Rugby League Project if they are not a hard core fan of Rugby League. Pls see/check List of current UFC fighters for all 610 +/- fighter pages for verification. For McGregor - here, his height is 5'8".
2. Since 2007, Sherdog partnered with ESPN, providing extensive MMA content and fighter database to ESPN - see here - 1. There is also discussion on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard regarding Sherdog as a reliable source - see here - 2. Since Sherdog partnered with ESPN and ESPN is considered reliable then Sherdog info should be considered reliable as well which meetsWP:PROVEIT guidelines. Stay safe and thank you. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:08, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

• 1. As I said before, sherdog or any other 3rd party site that has nothing to do with the people in question is not a reliable source. It's not even a weak source. Check Proof by assertion for what you're doing. Who stops me from creating a website to list people's heights according to my wishes and make a couple of my friends agree with me to use it as a source for all MMA related content from now on in a wikiproject? I have nothing to do with those people and sherdog has nothing to do with MMA fighters.

Besides, that site has Eddie Alvarez at 5'10" and McGregor at 5'8". In reality, McGregor was clearly and significantly the taller man in their staredowns and fight. Here's an example and the UFC published video where it's taken from. That means that site called sherdog had made 4 or 5 inches of error which makes it competely unreliable anyways. Funnily enough, Wikipedia lists Eddie Alvarez at 5'8" instead of 5'10" which is sherdog's claim. When I consider all of this, your defense of using that 3rd party fan site or whatever it is as the sole source of mixed martial artist profiles is getting beyond absurd and I feel bad commenting on such a silly matter.

• 2. You can't overrule WP:V and WP:RS with any wikiproject or getting one or two users kinda agree with you in a noticeboard nearly a decade ago. That wasn't a consensus back then and it's certainly not now. Lordpermaximum (talk) 13:06, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

1. YouTube in and of itself is not prohibited as a RS. Proof by assertion ("Sherdog is a reliable source") is a logical fallacy. 2. "For all MMA pages in Wikipedia, we use Sherdog.com" - no, "we" don't. Some authors might, and that's fair enough. A wikiproject may well have decided to use it, some years ago, but that wikiproject is dead and other sources of at least the same standing - such as ufc.com - have been presented and a wikiproject does not overrule wikipedia policies such as [[WP:V}}, WP:RS and WP:CON. 3. One person posting a query and three people answering on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard, nine years ago, where they mostly go "Yeah, it looks ok", does not mean it is forever set in stone and other sources can't also be used. 4. Therefore, as a compromise, I propose changing the entry to read "5ft 8in,<sherdog reference> or 5ft 9in<ufc reference>". Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 09:58, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

I thought you agreed with the 'assessment' that he's 511 because of a 14 minute YouTube video? Make your mind up for this wind up.NEDOCHAN (talk) 11:16, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Bastun, I agree with everything you said except the last part. I won't compromise on such an obvious thing. What they're trying to take as a source and disregard the actual evidence is against any principal and ideology of Wikipedia. It's against WP:V and WP:RS but that's only a minor thing compared to how it destroys any common sense and reliability of Wikipedia. If we let this go now, it would only lead to degradation of the quality of content and make way to unreliable sources in thousands of biographies of living persons in one swift stroke.

Besides, are we going to include every 3rd party site as a reference for people's heights from now on only to have 5, 6 or even more listings in the infobox for each one of them? I think even discussing such a clear-cut matter in length gives credit to what these few users try to accomplish by exerting their control on thousands of pages by a couple of them getting together and accepting some irrelevant 3rd party site as the only source for anything MMA related. I'm going to use every tool available to stop them from damaging the remaining reliability and credibility of Wikipedia any further.

I would like to have an administrator perspective on this before going on with other tools available for the quick resolution of this dispute instead of dragging it any further. Especially considering the resolution of this dispute affects thousands of pages. It looks Deepfriedokra, Airplaneman and Goodnightmush were the last administrators to had involvement with this page. I would like to hear their opinions.Lordpermaximum (talk) 13:06, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Lordpermaximum - I'm an administrator, and I'm uninvolved - I think this article is only on my watchlist because I've reverted vandalism here in the past, I know nothing about the subject and have no opinion on him (if I'm honest, I don't really know what MMA is). Some things to get out of the way first of all:

• First, this talk page is categorically not the place for you to suggest that there is some kind of off-wiki collusion or bad faith editing going on amongst named individuals. On article talk pages, you should stick to discussing article content; if you want to make accusations of improper conduct, you need to take them to the appropriate forum, which for accusations like that would be WP:ANI, or (if it involves off-wiki evidence) you should ask an administrator whether you can e-mail them details. You should also read WP:ASPERSIONS. I'm going to ask that you either withdraw those accusations, or present your evidence in the proper manner.
• Strictly speaking, YouTube is a medium rather than a source. So, if there was something reported by the BBC, CNN or whatever, which appeared on their own accredited YouTube channel, that would be fine to use as a source. Random YouTube channels, however, are just that - random YouTube channels, and they often do publish footage that violates copyright. I very much doubt that 'Best of UFC', a channel with 77 subscribers and no information on their 'About' page, actually owns the rights to the footage they upload to YouTube. Posting links to videos like that anywhere on Wikipedia is not allowed (see WP:YOUTUBE for more on this), because our copyright policy prohibits not just the posting of copyright violations, but also the posting of links to copyright violations. Note that the copyright policy applies to talk pages just as much as it does to articles themselves, so once I've finished posting this message I'm going to remove some of the links you posted above. Please do not reinstate them, or post links to YouTube channels of that sort again.
• I'm not sure what I'm meant to be looking for in the 'behind the scenes' footage video - does it make an assertion, or is the reader expected to listen out for something a doctor says in order to verify the claim? What is 'The Mac Life', and does it have the kind of reputation for fact checking that we expect from WP:RS? I will say that if he's 5'11", then the other people in the video seem to be unusually tall, but that obviously might genuinely be the case.

I haven't reviewed all of the sources fully - I'd suggest going with whichever seems best bearing in mind the guidance at RS, WP:INDEPENDENT and WP:SECONDARY. The UFC site is promotional, and wouldn't generally be my first go-to place for reliable information; that said, if you doubt the veracity of Sherdog, you could start a conversation at WP:RSN. GirthSummit _(blether) 14:35, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

I've had a look at the sources in a bit more detail now. I removed a link to one YouTube video which I believe was a copyright infringement; the others seem OK. I don't have any knowledge of Sherdog whatsoever, but I must admit it's not screaming RS at me - I can't find an 'about' page where they publish how they get their information, for example. BoxRec seems slightly better, in that they have an easily accessible 'About us' page where they list their editors, but I don't know much about their reputation for accuracy and they have some nice disclaimers about how any information on the site may be incomplete/inaccurate. Given that both RoxRec and UFC seem to agree on 5'9", and Sherdog seems to be the outlier at 5'8", editors involved in this discussion may wish to consider going with that. Best GirthSummit _(blether) 14:59, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Girth Summit, thanks for spending your time to review this dispute.

• First of all,I haven't made any accusations. Those were only suspicions. If anyone thinks otherwise, I say "I withdrew them" for the sake of the actual discussion.
• Youtube was not the source. The actual recorded video is the source. You can access the same video by going to The Mac Life's own site. The Mac Life is a media platform which is officially accredited by the UFC. Here, the UFC's official page hosts one of The Mac Life's videos. I can include TheMacLife links instead of YouTube ones if it's a problem. However I agree that the one link you removed had potential copyright violation. I'm sorry I missed it but I provided 6 or 7 sources so, it's not that bad. I'll try to find another source that doesn't have any doubt about copyright violation for that one.
• As far as the recorded video of Conor McGregor getting his barefoot height measured by an UFC official/staff goes, you pretty much focused on procedures instead of basis and merits. Wikipedia's main purpose is to provide accurate and quality content and that prevails everything else, including minor procuderus of its own. That video is still the most reliable source, especially considering you validated it such that it did not violate any copyright.
• Still, although I stand by my claim that the recorded video of someone getting measured by an UFC official is the best source you can have for a thing like height and for that reason Conor McGregor's listed on-page height should be 5'11", I can live with your suggestion to take UFC and BoxRec listings instead of sherdog and make it 5'9". This is going to have an effect on all MMA-related content.Lordpermaximum (talk) 15:32, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Lordpermaximum, thanks for explicitly withdrawing that. To be clear though, since I recognise that you're new - it doesn't matter whether it's an accusation, or just voicing a suspicion - it's not permitted on article talk pages. WP:NPA is quite clear - you should focus on content, not contributors or their motivations.

With regard to the source, I'm afraid that's not how we work. That video might be an interesting source for a journalist writing an piece about McGregor, but as an encyclopaedia our mission is to summarise reliable, published sources. We use sources that make assertions of fact in the authorial voice; that video makes no assertions of fact of any kind, it's just a fly on the wall view of what happened behind the scenes that day, and overhearing someone saying "71" while holding a tape measure is very different from having a representative of the UFC say to the camera "McGregor is 71" tall". For us to draw any conclusions of any kind from it is WP:OR, which is not permitted. Who knows why that video doesn't match up with the published sources - maybe the bloke with the tape measure made a mistake, and went back and remeasured him later? Maybe he said 71 and then wrote down 69"? We can't know - and we aren't permitted to guess. I'm afraid that video is of no use for our purposes.

Let's wait and see whether the other editors agree with using 5'9" and those sources - I have no special authority here with regard to editorial decisions, we'll need to see whether a consensus along those lines emerges. To be clear though, a consensus established here amongst a few editors will not have any kind of binding effect on other pages - that would require wider discussion, either on the relevant a Wikiproject page, or (more probably) via a more centralised discussion somewhere like WP:RSN. Best GirthSummit _(blether) 15:46, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Well, although I haven't really contributed until late, this is a 4-year old account and I contributed a lot to Wikipedia in the beginning of it as an IP user since I've been a webmaster for 16 years. But I'm glad you're providing guidence on this because as you said I'm not really experienced on disputes or their resolution.

Still I feel, people shouldn't have to prove water is wet let alone fail at it because of some Wikipedia procedures. The benefits of actual evidence and reality far outweighs a couple procedures of Wikipedia in a matter that's crucial to Wikipedia's existence in the first place. If we have to prove what the UFC official meant in that video by saying "71 inches" (or wondering about if he made a mistake or not), we're opening a can of worms and it would send shockwaves through out the whole Wikipedia. As you could see in the removed link which I'm going to replace with an unquestionable source pretty soon, UFC listed McGregor 5'11" too before his fights in the begining of his UFC career. So that means the UFC took its official's measurement of Conor McGregor as correct. Lordpermaximum (talk) 16:23, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Lordpermaximum, on the contrary, this is not a can of worms: it's routine, it's what we do, and it's supported by core policies like WP:V, and WP:OR. We do not allow editors to interpret video evidence for themselves and then report their interpretation as fact; we don't try to prove things; we don't even evaluate evidence. We summarise secondary sources, written by people who have already done that interpretation and evaluation, and who have a reputation for doing a good job of it. That's by design - it's a feature, not a bug.

You are welcome to add any sources you like to the discussion, but bear in mind that we would go with whatever the most recent sources say - if there are old sources saying 5'11", but all the current ones say 5'9", we'll say 5'9". Who knows - maybe the old ones were wrong, or maybe he shrank, but we would use the most current sources to support an assertion about his current height.

(Sorry, forgot to sign the above post) ​GirthSummit _(blether) 16:28, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

I understand. But the strength of evidence should be the main factor to consider if we are to include a source. It should overrule recency if multiple sources' strength of evidence are not equal. That's common sense and it's based on my universal law knowledge. But if you do things differently here when it comes to the strenth of evidence and recency comparison, or rely on a single person or more outside of Wikipedia for the evaluation of an evidence the source has and therefore you can't judge it as an editor, I cannot object any more. But I still don't understand how do you evaluate the outside evaluator of matters, evidences, incidents etc. then. By the way I added another link to another video that has no potential copyright issues in the place of the removed one. That shows the UFC accepted it's official's measurement of McGregor and used it (5'11") as his height in the announcement and in the infocard. I don't know how you're going to evaluate the evaluator in this case.Lordpermaximum (talk) 16:58, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Lordpermaximum As I said above, we don't evaluate evidence - we assess the reliability of sources which themselves evaluate evidence. The recentness of the source is not the only factor we'd consider - far from it - but an old source from the UFC can't trump a new source from the UFC. Who knows why they changed their minds about this, but if that's what they've done, and we think they're a reliable source, we go with their more recent value in the assumption that they have corrected an error. Squared.Circle.Boxing's sources below draw a line under this for me - 5'9" is what we should go with, supported by CBS, ESPN and/or the Indy. (Not the Express - that would tank at RSN) GirthSummit _(blether) 17:42, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

I had my input and I have nothing more to provide for the core of the topic. But I see where you're coming from and if it's how Wikipedia operates, I can live with it being 5'9". In matters of like this, using sources such as UFC.com and ESPN instead of an unreliable source like Sherdog is far more convincing. In short, given how Wikipedia operates as you pointed out as an administrator, I agree with you Girth Summit and I thank you for your valuable input and guidance on this matter. I've learnt a lot from this on how Wikipedia operates and what some of its procedures are. I'm also glad we especially agreed on the unreliability of rather unknown 3rd party sites such as Sherdog which has very questionable information.Lordpermaximum (talk) 18:02, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Lordpermaximum, I'm glad this has been helpful; please note though that while I have expressed personal reservations over Sherdog, I am not an authority on the subject matter, and I have not said that I think that UFC is better in general terms. Please don't read anything I've said as implying that I would necessarily agree to changes to other articles. A discussion at RSN might be a good thing if you want to take more wide-ranging action. GirthSummit _(blether) 18:16, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Girth Summit, I got it. Let me rephrase it again then. Although I still stand by my claim that McGregor's height should be 5'11" when I consider every information out there, I partly agree with you that McGregor's height can be listed as 5'9" here in his Wikipedia page, and I completely agree with you that sherdog is not a reliable source, at least in this case. I know that a discussion at WP:RSN would be more helpful for wider range of action on other MMA-related pages.Lordpermaximum (talk) 20:01, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Lordpermaximum, I have not said that I believe Sherdog to be unreliable. What I said can be viewed above: it doesn't fill me with confidence, but I'm not familiar with it, its methods, or its reputation. I go no further than that - I have not investigated fully, and I would want to hear others' views before making my mind up. Best GirthSummit _(blether) 21:05, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Girth Summit Thanks for your contribution to discussion. Shortly, you think we should go with the 5'9" listing as Conor McGregor's height instead of 5'11", 5'10" or 5'8" and Sherdog doesn't scream a reliable source to you. That's all I could gather. Did I misquote anything this time? Hopefully not. As I said I've learnt some useful information about how a Wikipedia administrator thinks about source and evidence evaluation along with some perspective on a couple of the Wikipedia procedures. Thanks for that also.Lordpermaximum (talk) 21:51, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Lordpermaximum, that is correct - it doesn't scream RS to me. I have said no more than that, and intended to imply no more than that. You put words in my mouth above - I ask that you don't do that. GirthSummit _(blether) 22:19, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Girth Summit, I'm truly sorry if I did that. I must have misinterpreted what you said. Thankfully everything's on record here and you have your edits here in front of everyone. If someone else misinterprets what you wrote again just like me, there's always that anyways. However, I'm very clear-minded on this issue and I stand by my claim that Conor McGregor's height should be 5'11" because of various reputable sources. I can only see the logic behind 5'9" listing and agree with it if all MMA-related biographies in Wikipedia consider sources such as ESPN, CBS, Independent, BoxRec, UFC, Bellator or One as reputable instead of some website called sherdog that has nothing to with the people in question or the organizations of the Sport but relied on as the sole source because of a Wikiproject that gathered a couple users a decade ago and has been long dead.Lordpermaximum (talk) 22:34, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

As it stands, 5'9 is what all recent and reliable sources list his height as. In no particular order: CBS Sports, Independent, Express, and ESPN. Doesn't matter how many listings one can find from his early career that list him as 5'11...it's just not gonna happen. – ².O.^Boxing 17:28, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

I believe that ESPN gets its data from Sherdog. We have been through this on the Dan Henderson talk page. Sherdog is the best source as the UFC isn't that reliable and, which is far more, it only contains info on UFC fighters. If both heights must be listed in the way they are on the Dan Henderson page, then fine, but it opens a can of worms. NEDOCHAN (talk) 19:40, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

You believe? That's some strong proof. Sherdog is the best source? You mean the sherdog with its perfect Eddie Alvarez and Conor McGregor height claims? And the UFC isn't reliable like Sherdog? According to who? You? I thought we shared Proof by assertion before, but you don't need that, do you? It's also certainly easier to get everything from one source, right? Why do we even bother with trying to refer to different sources? We should have thought about it before. Thanks for your proofs and immeasurably logical approach on this matter.Lordpermaximum (talk) 22:01, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

https://www.sherdog.com/news/news/ESPN-Sherdog-Announce-Agreement-7538NEDOCHAN (talk) 23:05, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

You're posting a deal that was made 13.5 years ago? It says "As part of the agreement, ESPN will highlight exclusive, in-depth Sherdog content contextually within ESPN.com, including news, interviews, videos, event listings, and more. ESPN.com's new Mixed Martial Arts section index will also feature Sherdog's Fight Finder module, which allows users to search the largest fighter database online for stats and personal information. Sherdog's weekly online Radio show will be offered at ESPNRadio.com and for download via the ESPN PodCenter." None of those things that were mentioned in the quote are found on ESPN right now and they haven't been found on ESPN for years. It's normal considering it's been 13.5 years. Because it's pretty much obvious that deal ended a long time ago. On top of that we still have ESPN as a reputable source. Why don't we use the real thing instead of settling for the other? As of right now, they have huge discrepancies between themselves anyways so it's another proof that the deal in question was ended, probably a long time ago. Lordpermaximum (talk) 23:30, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

@Girth Summit and Lordpermaximum:, Lordpermaximum, Sherdog is a reliable source as since 2007, Sherdog partnered with ESPN, providing extensive MMA content and fighter database to ESPN - see here - 1. There is also discussion on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard regarding Sherdog as a reliable source - see here - 2 that confirmed Sherdog is a reliable source. Since Sherdog partnered with ESPN and ESPN is considered reliable then Sherdog info should be considered reliable as well which meetsWP:PROVEIT guidelines. The reason by MMA infobox use Sherdog it is because there are thousands of thousands MMA fighter in the world and Sherdog is the biggest MMA database and it records not only UFC fighters but all fighter in the world and follow by Tapology (note: ESPN started broadcast UFC fights as of 2020 and also note: Wikipedia is about WP:V and WP:PROVEIT with secondary source and not about WP:But it's true - rightfully, ESPN is associated with UFC for they signed contract for the broadcasting rights of all UFC fights for 7 years (2020 to 2027) which makes ESPN not independent source, and Sherdog is a third party (secondary and independent source). Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 04:27, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

I agreed to go along with citing Sherdog stats because of Cassiopeia's insistence but I just wanted to chime in here and say I don't wholly agree with it either. Yes it is a huge database for MMA statistics but at the same time should it really be the end all be all source for information on MMA fighters? ESPN has stats on their website for MMA which through some research you'll find is actually more up to date than Sherdog. A lot of the fighter's stats on Sherdog are actually out of date. ESPN updates the weight of fighter's to what they currently weigh in at which Sherdog does not do. While I agree that a lot of the older fighter's who may be retired have pretty accurate stats on Sherdog I would make the argument for current fighter's from UFC and Bellator still competing regularly that ESPN's website is more accurate and up to date. And it is an official source and partner with the UFC so I don't see how it is not as reliable if not more so than Sherdog which is a third party source honestly. Hunterb212 (talk) 06:34, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Hunterb212 pls note, as I provided link above - ESPN used Sherdog info since 2007 (pls read). For weight we place upper limit of each weight class and not everytime of their weight in, except heavyweight as not all fighter hit their upper limit. Note each disclipne sport use its database and not ESPN, eventhought ESPN might have the info for ESPN is a TV channel and do have association (not independent source) whereby Wikipedia is all about secondaly, independent source. I do suggest new mma editor read about WikiProject MMA history to understand further how things work. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 07:08, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, people are raising valid concerns about Sherdog here. The RSN discussion was poorly attended, and a long time in the past. We don't know whether the tie-in between ESPN and Sherdog is still in effect, and as I said before I'm not seeing much on Sherdog about where their info comes from. That doesn't mean I'm about to move to have it depracated as a source, but in this particular instance we have multiple high-quality independent RS which disagree with Sherdog, and agree with each other - why would we go with Sherdog's figure? GirthSummit _(blether) 07:29, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes you have stated that multiple times Cassiopeia but that doesn't explain the discrepancies between the stats listed on ESPN and Sherdog. If that partnership is still in effect why are the stats different on ESPN's website than what's listed on Sherdog? Do some research and you will find like I said that the ESPN stats are more up to date and current. And who decided that the standard procedure was to use heaviest weight recorded in that weight class instead of current weight the fighter's have most recently weighed in at? To me using the most current stats makes more sense and is more accurate. For example look up Jacare Souza's weight on Sherdog, it's listed at 185 lb which is out of date because he moved up a weight class and now fights at light heavyweight and weighs in at 205 lb. That's just one example of many. Look at Stipe Miocic's weight on ESPN listed at 233 lb which is what he last weighed in at, yet on Sherdog it's still listed at 245 lb. This shows Sherdog is not up to date on fighter stats pretty clearly. To me I think ESPN's main website is a more reliable and official source. Hunterb212 (talk) 07:20, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Can I please point out that this discussion was started by an editor who thinks the height of McGregor is 5 feet eleven? And who's broken the 3rr rule making that edit? If anyone is interested, Sherdog used to list McGregor at 59 but changed it fairly recently. It is just as plausible that it's ESPN that's not up-to-date as Sherdog. Info boxes are not compulsory and the one in question has Sherdog as its source. Sherdog also contains full fight records and even source for nicknames. MMA pages are vandalised and played with continually and the project that keeps it sensible need help. What we don't need is to have to spend ages reverting an editor who thinks McGregor is 5 feet eleven. The answer to this discussion is no. It shouldn't say 511. The Sherdog Vs others debate can take place elsewhere.NEDOCHAN (talk) 08:23, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

• I did not break 3RR. You're lying and accusing me of something I did not do. I want you to withdraw your accusation. The edit history of the article shows I reverted other editors' changes 3 times that day and in the whole history, total, not more.
• No, Sherdog did not change Conor McGregor's listing from 5'9" to 5'8". You're lying again and here's the archive link as the proof. His height has been listed as 5'8" since 2013 in that site.
• So far, I provided around 10 reputable sources, perhaps even more in this discussion. You on the other hand have provided one dead source from 13.5 years ago that's barely relevant to actual topic, have only made false accusations and assertions. See Proof_by_assertion. I'm sharing this link for the 5th time or so.
• This section is about how to approach Conor McGregor and other MMA people's height and other attributes as far as reliable sources go. It's completely relevant to the title and my first edit covers pretty much the whole topic. There's not a rule that we should limit the whole discussion to one sentence in the section title and stop the discussion if one person doesn't agree with it instead of finding a middle ground after a compromise or or coming up with a completely new look at the topic after expanding the discussion into other relevant areas.
• Sherdog.com is self-published, has no about page, it's been very outdated through out the years, other reputable sources tend to agree with their listings but they tend to disagree with Sherdog's listings as you can see from the links I and others provided. Even if we take sherdog as a reliable source, which we definetely shouldn't, why should it outweigh other reputable sources and become the sole source for anything MMA-related?Lordpermaximum (talk) 09:17, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Where are the 10 reliable sources that say he's 5 11? You made the same edit 4 times. NEDOCHAN (talk) 09:49, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Not for the first time, I'm seeing a lot of ownership going on on this page. There are multiple sources as equally reliable as Sherdog, if not moreso, putting McGregor's height at something other than 5ft8. There is nothing to stop us using them. We're not talking about 5ft 11 any more, why bring that up again? We're talking about 5ft 9. Even extending to putting in an "or 5ft 8" and two sources. This is a perfectly reasonable compromise. Why keep fighting it? Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 09:52, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm okay with 5'9" and I'll stop insisting we should go with 5'11" if we are to use those reliable sources instead of Sherdog from now on. But I certainly disagree with coming up two values for the height. What happens if all of let's say 5 sources disagree with each other for another person that has a Wikipedia page? Why don't we use 5,8", 5,9", 5,11" altogether then since the video provided is certainly more recent than Sherdog's claim which was last updated in 2013? Before that there was no height listing for McGregor in sherdog.com according to archive.org. So, it seems someone entered McGregor's height in 2013 in that site as what s/he though it was at the time and never updated that again. So, taking that approach would not be ideal. However, I'll compromise and agree with the middle ground 5'9" here if this is to become an example for everything MMA-related. This discussion has already attracted far more users and has much much more indetail explanation than some RSN that was attended by two editors a decade ago.Lordpermaximum (talk) 10:07, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

NEDOCHAN, I said I provided around 10 reliable sources for the actual topic and you provided one that's barely relevant. I did not say "there are 10 reliable sources that say he's 5'11". You're starting to skew the facts to suit your own agenda and you don't even talk about the valid concerns that were raised here. Instead you gou around the actual topic for some reason and not addressing those concerns.Lordpermaximum (talk) 09:56, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Also, there is no benefit to bringing up Lordpermaximum's edit history. They made an edit, reverted 3 times, and have not edited the article since receiving a 3RR warning, instead opening a talk page discussion. That's exactly what they're supposed to do. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 09:57, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Bastun. Please read comments. If both heights must be listed in the way they are on the Dan Henderson page, then fine.NEDOCHAN (talk) 11:19, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

For my sins, I have indeed read all the comments before commenting myself. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:43, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm not okay with that. I agreed with others and not going on with 5'11" just because of recency and consistency among MMA-related content although there are two high quality sources for that claim. That's why I agreed to 5'9" claims of other RS. Now, why should we use a very doubtful source (completely unreliable imo for reasons I mentioned before) as one half of the information and include it in, when there are multiple independent reliable sources that agree with eachother and claim McGregor is 5'9"? Also what are we going to do if there are 5 different listings from 5 different reliable sources and sherdog.com? Include every one of them? Then we should include 5'11" as well. The UFC's claim of 5'11 and the footage of measurement are both more recent than out-of-date sherdog.com. But anyways, this is not an ideal resolution.Lordpermaximum (talk) 11:29, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Then I'd suggest you calmly and studiously begin a discussion to that effect. NEDOCHAN (talk) 11:44, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Please note that unlike the hypothetical scenerio above, there are actually no different listings among recent reliable sources for Conor McGregor's height. That's why I also agreed to 5'9" listing. Sherdog.com is the sole exception even if it's a reliable source which is certainly not for a lot of reasons I mentioned before more than a few times. Let me repeat some of them again for the last time. Self-publishing, inexistence of an about page, out-of-date information and consistent discrepancies between sherdog and the reliable and reputable sources. On the contrary, those reliable sources are pretty much consistent between themselves.

I feel like I'm going around in circles here because of NEDOCHAN and CASSIOPEIA's unwillingness to truly address my and other editors' concerns here. I feel, we're only going to make the discussion unnecessarily longer considering we all pretty much provided everything necessary to disregard Sherdog especially in McGregor's case and go on with 5'9" as his listing of height. That's the compromise I made. I think this discussion was definetely longer than necessary anyways.Lordpermaximum (talk) 11:57, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Also I want everyone to please note that, NEDOCHAN and CASSIOPEIA never once provided a useful source or basis for their claims, never addressed our concerns and despite all of these, they never truly compromised like I did. I did everything I could so that we can find a middle ground already.Lordpermaximum (talk) 12:03, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

It's time to stop personalising this all round - I sympathise with Bastun here, reading through the full discussion and reviewing all the sources has not been fun, and the levels of hostility that have been generated over the question of someone's exact height are remarkable. NEDOCHAN didn't need to refer to your earlier edit warring, and you didn't need to call NEDOCHAN a liar and repeatedly mention them - keep it focussed on the content.

The best sources I'm seeing in this - the sources which are unquestionably independent, secondary and reliable - are the Independent and the CBS Sports sites, and they both agree on 5'9". They are supported by several of the other sources, like ESPN and some of the UFC sources, which while 'official' are arguably not fully independent of the subject; it's also supported by the BoxRec database, which is independent and probably reliable-ish. The other sources are outliers - the subject himself and his coaching team seem to have given a number of different values over the course of his career, for reasons we can only speculate on in the absence of any sources discussing the disparity. I don't see any reason to do anything other than give a figure of 5'9" supported by the best sources (the Indy and CBS), and to draw a line under this. Does anyone have a problem with that approach? GirthSummit _(blether) 12:14, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

I do not.Lordpermaximum (talk) 12:20, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Nor me. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 14:00, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Unless there's an equal amount of reliable, independent and recent sources that list him as 5'8, then 5'9 is the only option. 5'11 is a definite no. And just to be clear, my opinion is not an endorsement of Sherdog being unreliable or the appropriateness of its use in other articles. This discussion is solely related to this article only and has no site-wide impact on the use of Sherdog. – ².O.^Boxing 14:04, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

I haven't been remotely hostile. I was just pointing out that this discussion's title is no longer relevant and that its origin demonstrates that. If we want to discuss the infobox and the source used then we should: on WP:MMA. Stating that the Independent and CBS are the best RS isn't a good solution as we have to bear in mind that fighter info should be able to be verified and The Independent and CBS do not offer that opportunity for 90% of fighters. Please, look at Dan Henderson. This situation occurred and a solution was found.NEDOCHAN (talk) 14:28, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

NEDOCHAN, my view is that each article should use the most reliable sources for any item of information about the subject of that article. You seem to be saying that all our articles for MMA fighters should use the same source for their information on personal statistics. If that is your position, please can you explain what policy it's based on? If it's not your position, please can you explain what you're arguing here? And no, WP:MMA isn't the place to discuss changes to this article, although you are welcome to post a neutral notice there drawing attention to the discussion on this talk page. Best GirthSummit _(blether) 14:42, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

The infobox is not compulsory and the info in it is sourced to an agreed RS. What I am arguing is that Sherdog reliably contains data that's in the infobox. Nicknames, for instance. Fight records, method of finish. It's not a coincidence that those of us who actually edit MMA pages understand this and those who don't, don't. Discussion as to infoboxes should take place at the place where the infoboxes were drawn up. The point, Girth, is that this is an infobox. It's not compulsory. Sherdog is the biggest MMA database in the world and, as Cass pointed out, a lack of familiarity with it and/or anecdotal observations as to its accuracy aren't going to change that. This discussion should be closed as it's supposed to be about his being 511. A new one can be begun, fine. But discussion about the infobox, which isn't compulsory, should take place elsewhere.NEDOCHAN (talk) 14:53, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry NEDOCHAN, but that is not in line with my understanding of how discussions work here. The title of this discussion has no bearing on whether or not consensus for a change emerges - it was initially about 5'11", it's now about 5'9". I'd be happy to change the title of the thread to 'His height', if that would set your mind at ease?

You are right, infoboxes aren't compulsory - you could start a thread on getting rid of it altogether, if you like. However, if we are to have one, it should be reflect what the most reliable sources say about this subject. If it is your position that all MMA infoboxes should use a particular source for the sake of uniformity, even when more multiple RS contradict that source, I've never heard anything like it before - we always use the best available sources for each individual subject on the article about that subject. I don't know you personally, but I have worked closely with CASS in other areas of the project and I have a great regard for her judgement, so I don't rule out the possibility that I'm in the wrong here, but I would like to understand how your position is grounded in policy. GirthSummit _(blether) 15:07, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

I will let CASS do that. I definitely don't see consensus here. I won't comment any more as this sort of stuff crops up all the time and it's dull. My position is clear. Sherdog is an agreed RS. There is some discrepancy. We could put both AS WE DID ON DAN HENDERSON. Please, please look at that page.NEDOCHAN (talk) 15:22, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

I will wait for CASSIOPEIA to comment as I'd really like to understand that position, but I now count five editors who would be content with simply having 5'9" supported by the Indy and CBS - in the absence of a policy-based argument against doing to, I see that as good grounds for making the change. GirthSummit _(blether) 15:34, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

It's been 1.5 days (~30 hours), the editor in question has been active in that time, has been pinged more than a few times and still decided not to participate in the final stages of this discussion. "Not hypothetical" section of Wikipedia:What is consensus? states:"While everyone on Wikipedia has the right to be heard, this does not mean that discussions remain open indefinitely until we hear from them. Nor does it mean that a consensus should be overridden by an appeal to "Wikipedians out there" who silently disagree." Moreover, "Resolving content disputes with outside help" section of Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution clarifies: "Participation in content dispute resolution is voluntary and no one is required to participate if they do not care to do so, but it must be borne in mind that in some forums and processes[4] a discussion may proceed without an editor who chooses not to participate and consensus may be reached without the nonparticipating editor's input. Moreover, there is no policy or guideline which prohibits administrators or the community from taking an editor's failure or refusal to participate in content dispute resolution into consideration (or manner or degree of participation) as an item of evidence in a discussion about whether an editor's activities have, overall, been in the best interest of the encyclopedia."

Girth Summit, Bastun, Hunterb212, Squared.Circle.Boxing, CASSIOPEIA, NEDOCHAN, we've reached a consensus after a long talk here. I too count 5 editors which agreed with Girth Summit's proposal including himself. 1 editor is against the proposal and has stopped participating in the dicussions by his own admission and the last editor who participated in the discussions before, has failed to participate since then despite the fact that she was given enough time and pinged a few times. In light of all of this along with Wikipedia:Consensus, Wikipedia:What is consensus? and Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution 's clear policies I propose we should move on and stop waiting indefinetely for the last editor who's failure to participate is obvious by now.Lordpermaximum (talk) 17:03, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Lordpermaximum, chill out with all the bold text and wiki links. I was going to give Cass a bit longer to see if she wants to comment further, then make the change if not. We don't need to get all shouty about it. GirthSummit _(blether) 18:02, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

English is not my native language. I'm relatively new in Wikipedia dispute resolutions. I don't know if using bold text for Wikpedia policy quotes in dicussions is prohibited or not. However I'm an international relations master, a data scientist and a webmaster. I've been doing my work for the last 16 years. I've been involved in many law actions. I've seen and contributed in the beginnings of Wikipedia as an IP user. I tried to be as civil as possible in this discussion. You may be a wikipedia administrator and an English teacher but if you don't stop your patronizing attitude towards me and put your past relations with other editors aside, I'll request comment on the suitability of you being an administrator. As a Wikipedia editor it's my duty to remind you that you are never required to use your tools, and you must never use them to gain an advantage in a dispute in which you were involved according to Wikipedia:Administrators. Also, according to Administrator conduct, Administrators should lead by example and, like all editors, should behave in a respectful, civil manner in their interactions with others. Administrators should follow Wikipedia policies and perform their duties to the best of their abilities. Sustained or serious disruption of Wikipedia through behavior such as incivility or bad faith editing is incompatible with the expectations and responsibilities of administrators, and consistent or egregious poor judgment may result in the removal of administrator tools.

As a Wikipedia editor, I see the consensus here and according to policies of Wikipedia:Consensus, Wikipedia:What is consensus? and Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution, neither I nor any other editor should wait for one particular editor's opinion indefinetely if he refuses to participate in the discussion. And according to Wikipedia:Administrators, no Administrator can force any editor to wait for one particular editor who failed to participate in discussions and deny the execution of the consensus. I'm executing what the consensus requires and changing Conor McGregor's height from 5 ft 8 in to 5 ft 9 in, according to the reliable, secondary and independent sources of CBS Sport and the Independent as we agreed upon. If you have problem with that, achieve another consensus but you can't act as an Administrator on that because of the Wikipedia:Administrators policy, as you're involved with the dispute in the first place. Best, Lordpermaximum (talk) 21:39, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Lordpermaximum, I don't need you to explain the role of the administrator to me - have I ever, at any point in this thread, threatened to implement sanctions against anyone? Or use the tools in any way? Have I suggested that my view is of more weight than anyone else's? Only at the very beginning of this thread did I claim to be uninvolved, when I was so, and I took time to explain a few simple points of proper conduct to you. I positively invite you to ask anyone you like to review this discussion and comment on whether I have acted improperly at any point. Your own WP:BATTLEGROUND approach is responsible for a large proportion of the unnecessary heat in this thread - I'm just asking you to calm down and speak to people politely. GirthSummit _(blether) 05:08, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Girth SummitI simply disagree with you on my attitude in the discussions. When I think of what you're probably referring to, at one point of the disccusions I only defended an accusation towards me just one time and proved the accusation and other claims made by that editor were completely wrong and called him a liar (which I shouldn't have done no matter what when I think now as I am out of the heat of the moment) because of the editor in question's habit of spreading false information as facts along with his condescending attitude towards me since I'm relatively new in content disputes compared to him. I immediately gave it a rest after you told me to stop after that just one edit. But, I don't remember you asking that editor to withdraw his accusation although you asked me to do in the beginning, despite the fact that I didn't claim anything like that particular editor, mines were simple suspicions which I still withdrew if you anyone saw them as accusations. It was my first edit in my first discussion also so I don't think it was too bad. Still, I want to remind him and everyone here of WP:But I'm an administrator!, User:Jimbo Wales/Statement of principles #2, WP:Equality, WP:Newbies aren't always clueless. Being an experienced editor or an administrator doesn't justify any patronizing attitude. Anyways, I only talked about this because suddenly you claimed I wasn't being polite which I didn't expect and probably referred to the begining of the discussions which happened a few days ago, likely in defence of your patronzing attitude. Anyways, this is not content related any more and I don't want to attend to personal matters here.

The discussions seem to have come to an end. I thank everyone for their participation and I'm truly sorry if I ever offended anyone without knowing. Best, Lordpermaximum (talk) 08:42, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Well I am not as experienced an editor on here as some of you who have thousands and thousands of edits under your belt, but I have been watching MMA since the very beginning and am quite familiar with fighter's stats. When I began editing some pages including McGregor who I updated to ESPN stats and listed him at 5'9" Cassiopeia immediately gave me a warning that I was being disruptive. I found that to be pretty unwarranted as I provided a reliable, official, and accurate source for my edit. It seems that he/she and a few others on here police MMA pages as if they are the ultimate authority and revert anything you do if it does not pertain to Sherdog. This is pretty disheartening for a newer editor like myself who is only trying to improve accuracy and providing official sources when doing so. I relented because I know it's against policy to edit war and I don't feel like fighting over an inch of someone's height. But I will say I think ESPN should be allowed to use as a source for fighter stats in some cases especially with current fighters such as McGregor. This is because like I already stated ESPN's site updates their fighter stats and info after every weigh in which Sherdog does not. To me that makes ESPN a more accurate and up to date source and I don't see what's disruptive about using it or why I was threatened to be blocked from editing over it. For the record also Cassiopeia continually claims that Sherdog is partners with ESPN yet there are many discrepancies between the two sources information that seems to contradict that claim. Hunterb212 (talk) 15:23, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Guys, give me a day or two to respond for it usually take about one week for discussion and if disucssion is still going on after a week then we will let other editor to voice their opionion. I have day job and I am also a counter vandalism and new page trainer, besides my normal editing, which I need to review assignment at times and since the we are allow to go to gym, I have limited time left after go to gym from work. Guys, pls do not revert the edit on the article and not edit warring for you will be blocked if you revert more than 3 times during 24hrs on the same articlee - see WP:3RR until the discussion is official close. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:47, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Two quick observations, since this is getting out of hand: I don't think any of you want me to look at the ANEW report since I'm in the habit of blocking people there. Observation one: let NO ONE claim that that YouTube video of his debut or whatever is reliable evidence of anything. Some dude is fumbling aroud with some measuring tape--NOTHING about that is acceptable. Observation two: MMA has turned into another fan zone, like rassling and K-pop, where unreliable sources with great commercial interests are treated like reliable sources; Sherdog is one of those, but it happens to be broadly accepted by all those who contribute to these articles, for better or for worse.

I do NOT want to go through the history to see who's warring more than whom, because from the looks of this conversation I'd end up blocking all of y'all. User:Girth Summit, User:Cassiopeia, you have some more thorough Wikipedia experience than some of the others; maybe you can set up something like an RfC, without the accusations (yes, Lordpermaximum, your "suspicions" are accusations and thus violations of WP:AGF, and I don't mind blocking for that) and the endless conversations/distractions. Surely this can be solved in a better way than my heavy-handed way. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 03:20, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey Drmies, I hope you don't go down the 'block all y'all" route too hastily, I only showed up to try to sort out last week's edit war, and got drawn into the content/sourcing discussion because I was as alarmed as you are at the suggestion of using that video as a source. This discussion has been heated, repetitive and ugly, but there have been a number of people engaging on talk without touching the article itself (and, sadly, a number of people doing the opposite).

CASSIOPEIA Would you be open to Drmies' suggestion of an RFC? I'm thinking along the lines of a choice between three options: 5'8" (supported by Sherdog); 5'9" (supported by the Indy and CBS, possibly with UFC and ESPN as well); and mention of both, supported by the same refs. The question would set out the options, with a Survey section below it, and a Threaded Discussion section where people could explain your position in detail. Does that seem fair to you? Cheers all GirthSummit _(blether) 06:01, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

As an RfC has been mentioned, I think it should be noted here that there has been an RfC opened at RSN in an attempt to deprecate sherdog. Said RfC was started due to this discussion and the outcome would (probably won't lol) affect an RfC here. Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Sherdog.com. Once that nonsense has finished I think an RfC here would be a good option. Most are in favour of 5'9 but NEDOCHAN mentioned how multiple heights are listed in a note on Dan Henderson (sorry, I must have skipped over that comment), which I don't see a problem with. – ².O.^Boxing 08:49, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

And as I proposed on the 10th. I think the important principle, though, is we don't list what Sherdog says, and only that, and deprecate every other source, "because SHERDOG!", which is what had been happening. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 10:18, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

I believe Sherdog serves as a common ground for most of the information. Obviously they are not the ultimate guide to it. If we have other reliable sources (like the measuring video for example), we should take that in account and use it as the most reliable option for that case. We use it as means to add fight results, but they're not always right. To me they are still a reliable source, but I never took them for the only option available. I believe such cases require discussion and people should be open to consider other sources as more accurate than Sherdog itself. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 19:55, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Gsfelipe94, just for the avoidance of doubt, the 'measuring video' is not a reliable source, and could not be used to support any assertion of any kind on this project. This has been the subject of protracted discussion already - it is not in any doubt. GirthSummit _(blether) 20:05, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

I mentioned it in a way of saying that a different source (let's say another media website or even the UFC) used that measuring as their official height for McGregor. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 20:07, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Gsfelipe94, we don't know whether anyone ever used the measurement taken in that video as a basis for their figures. We know that a number of sources used a figure that matched it in the past, and that they have since updated their figures. As far as I'm aware, no current sources use that figure - hence why I proposed leaving it out of the RfC suggested above. If any current sources still use it, please let us know so we can consider whether they should be included in the RfC. GirthSummit _(blether) 21:50, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

@Drmies and Girth Summit: and the rest of the involved editors here. Sorry for taking a little longer than I would like to and here I am trying to stay out late to reply for now is close to 1 am here . A RfC for Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Responses (Sherdog.com) discussion has been raised prior I have a chance to start one and you might want to have a read. Secondly, the conversation here "the height of the subject" is in the infobox and not about Sherdog is the only sore source for the entire article content. Sherdog is a biggest MMA fighter profile page as well as a media source for MMA news in the world. Each fighter article do have external link to Sherdog. The MMA info box used Sherdog as the source to record fighter record, height, nickname, team, fighting out of among other things where the source is stated at the bottom of the infobox. Those info that in the Infobox but could not obatin from Sherdog MMA fighter page would need to be sourced such as reach, trainer, spouse, university and etc. It is common in Wikipedia to use its specific sport databases for the specific fields and usually the soruce are not tied to ESPN or major newspapers. Here is List of current UFC fighters for your reference. It is challenging at time editing MMA pages as MMA fans/editors are extremely emotinally tied to certain fighters. We do have a lot of vandalsim/trolling and editing warrings in MMA events/fighters page especially after some internet meme/name calling/lost a fighter in spactacular KO fashion or claiming one fighter representing of one country and not the other, or ethnicity. At times during big fight (PPV event) we do not have time to revert/correct the vandalsim edits as they come like a giant flood. MMA wikipedia communinity is rather broken due to in fighting and many have left or not to join any discussions. It is rather sad for Wikipedia is a place where editors collorate and support each other and yet MMA wikipedia community is struggling to achieve that at time. Stay safe and have a good night /morning everyone. Cassiopeia^(talk) 13:32, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi CASSIOPEIA, no worries about the delay in response - we're all busy, but thanks for re-engaging. So, my concern is that we should be using the most reliable sources available for any particular fact about any particular subject. Yes, the MMA infobox includes a link to Sherdog - but I don't understand why we should slavishly make our content match that at Sherdog, which is presented as an EL rather than a ref: it's not a problem if we have information referenced to other sources within the infobox itself. I don't have a problem using Sherdog as a source for stuff that isn't covered elsewhere - but when Sherdog's info is an outlier amongst multiple other reliable sources, surely you would agree that the best thing to do is to go with the other sources? Please let me know whether you feel an RfC would be a useful thing, or if you could get behind simply changing this supported by the sources discussed above. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 19:40, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Drmies and Girth Summit: I have no problem with RfC. Some info here - Sherdog is not only the largest MMA fighter database but also a MMA media. All (I mean thousands of thousands) MMA fighter pages in EN Wikipedia, Sherdog is recorded a the source in the infobox (at the bottom of the info box) and at the bottom of the fight record (example Stipe Miocic the current Heavyweight champion where you can fight sherdog source at the infobox and bottom of the fight table - ref#97), also you can check out the fighters in List of current UFC fighters. The reason to use Sherdog in the fight record is to prevent editors to change its info as they interepret themselves especially in fight "method" as this is the WikiProject MMA - WP:MMA guidlines. This apply in the same reason that of the infobox. The infobox tempalate is set up with Sherdog as the source in place and any parameters (info) can not be obtain from Sherdog profile page will need to be supported by other source if info is added. Sherdog, MMAjunkie.com and MMA Fighting are the 3 biggest MMA media in the world with Sherdog as the pioneer where they establish in 1997 4 years after Pancrase and Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC)in 1993 two of pioneers MMA promotion established. Editors and admin (Woody) stated they never heard about Sherdog it is because Sherdog specilises/covers only MMA (a MMA media). Most sport fans and casual MMA fans would not heard about. Sherdog is extremely well-known by all MMA fans who follows MMA for years/closely just as most people have not heard about Boxrec (Boxer database) if they only watch a few heavyweight title bouts a year or know about Rugby League Project if they are not a hard core fan of Rugby League. Editors have not heard about Sherdog has nothing to do with the its independent and relaiblity. Media such as ESPN or other news channel would often partnered with "specific" sport media to get the info except for certain extremely popular sports national sports. To anwer your questions, why not using multiple sources, as it will have conflict of info such as this this page, we would record mulitple heights, multiple different methods of fight, nick names and the results will be edit warrings and many cases of ANI, disruptive edits, name callings, where you can see all the links here, commentary, and here and also on Reliable sources discussion (pls do read if you have time), we (MMA community in EN Wiki) would have such cases every 3/4 months in a year, and this one is particular spiral out of control. Editors spending so much time in all the disucssions in RSN, ANI/EW, editors' talk pages which some of comments are so discruptive and unhealthy that truely dampend the spirit of Wikipedia and Wikipedians especially to those tiredly given their time and effort to improve and provide good conributions. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:39, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

* Isn't this the same text you added at the noticeboard? You are again asserting that "Sherdog is the largest MMA fighter database" (I don't know what "also a MMA media" means), so I will again ask for a reliable third-party citation that backs this. The history of Sherdog is irrelevant. It is unclear why a "fighter database" partnering with one TV sports channel makes it a more reputable source than any other. It is absolutely unclear that this "partnership" is still in existence - searching for Sherdog on ESPN returns exactly four results: one from April, which mentions Sherdog in passing, three from 2018 and earlier. A Wikiproject - especially what appears to be a dead or at least moribund wikiproject - does not get to dictate to the rest of Wikipedia what sources can and can't be used, especially when - as in this case - other (equally reliable) sources disagree. And note there is consensus for that last point on the RS/N noticeboard. Lastly, I would suggest that at least some of the edit warring encountered on this and other MMA articles is because of ownership by a small cohort of editors, insisting on only The One True Source, Praise Be Unto It, being used. If reliable secondary sources such as The Independent and CBS Sports say McGregor is 5ft 9, I'll include that. This is perfectly in accordance with Wikipedia's policies. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:22, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Sherdog is largest independent MMA media site in the world and Sherdog is the official content partner - see of ESPN reported by Sport Illustor. Some site such as Tapology - second largest MMA fighter database or Fight Matrix the third largest do not report MMA news (MMA media sites/news sites) such as sherdog, MMA Junkie, MMA Fighting, Cageside Press, Comabat, MMA PL, MMA Mania, and etc. It is not the ownship issues, do note, those involved in all the discussion except few new to Wikipedia edits countless MMA fighters page just like I - their contribution logs would show that. WikiProject MMA is not dead but marred by so many edit warrings, name callings, attacks and discourage editors to participate or they just simple quite edit mma page. With your solution, other editors would add different height from different sources and we would ended up with 4/5 different height of a subject, for one page we have already so many issues and we woudl image how many issues would come for other pages. Take care Bastun and good night. Cassiopeia^(talk) 11:58, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

• You mean Sports Illustrated? Ok, you've pointed to a passing reference to Sherdog being "the largest independent MMA media site in the world", mentioned in one fifth of an article, by someone who was associated with Sherdog. That article is ten years old, so very much not current. If size is relevant, then it would also be important to note that the article does point out that sherdog Sherdog.com "went without access to the UFC from late 2005 until the middle of 2009" - almost half of the preceding decade! - and had just again lost access to the biggest MMA franchise in the world. Where, then, would it get its information from, to report in its database? Perhaps it itself used other independent, reliable sources?
• Sherdog may well have been named - in a 2010 news article - as the official partner of ESPN. Once again: ESPN does not seem to know they are still sherdog's partner, as they mention them exactly four times on their whole website: one from April, which mentions Sherdog in passing, three from 2018 and earlier. Sherdog do not mention this ESPN partnership anywhere I can find on their website, either. I do not doubt they once had this partnership. I don't believe they still do, and no evidence to that effect has been provided.
• Even if you do provide it - what, exactly, is the relevance of one website being an official partner of one particular American TV channel?
• I confess I'm having difficulty parsing the rest of your response, from "It is not the ownship issues", on (I gather English is not your first language, and that's fine). You seem to be saying that you and/or the MMA Wikiproject will refuse to accept any other source than sherdog for the infobox, to forestall edit warring? Please clarify whether I have that right, or not, because that will determine where we go from here. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 18:08, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Bastun I applogies for my poor command of English. I am multilingual but master of none. In addition I have mild case of Irlen Syndrome which does not help.

• The link has stated Sports Illustrated. I have also mentioned/explain to your regarding "went without access" in the WP:Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard discussion. Do note, UFC, although is the largest, is one of hundreds of MMA promoters in the world. Fighters fight in regional circuits which their info already in Sherdog. Only a small percentage of MMA fighters who are good enough to be signed by UFC. Sherdog database is not only record UFC fighters but all thousands of thousands of fighters in the world. How they get the info, I cant tell you for I dont work for Sherdog.
• I have already provided you the source (sport illustrated - independent source) that ESPN partnered with Sherdog for content. [

 HERE] is the announced from Sherdog. (I didnt provide you before as editor might argue that is a primary source).

• we all remember well Ariel Helwani and his associates were pulled form UFC press credentials for being just doing their job as good journalists would and should do. Their press credential were being pulled has nothing to do with the source reliability and independent.
• ESPN does not only air sprots program, but they also provide content. If ESPN is considered reliable and they used Sherdog content, that would make Sherdog relieable.
• Do note, we are not talking about a page notability here, so passing mentioned has nothing to do with it. It has been mentioned by Sports Illustrated (independent from Sherdog ) that they are the largest, independent reliable MMA source.
• MMA infobox and fighter records have been set up many years ago, before I joined Wikipedia, in Wikipidia Project MMA and discussions of the parameters did take place and it was set up to use Sherdog for any info could be obtained of the fighter profile for Sherog has been confirmed as reliable by Wikipeida years ago. If the info of Sherdog has been alreadly outdated such as a fighter moves to new country or change team or any info can not be obtain in Sherog fighter page, then info/new info can be added/changed as long as it is supported by source.
• Editng warring/disruptive edits do not produce effective way to slove an issue. As you might know user Lordpermaximum or "Perm" has been blocked by 3 admins for many reasons - see here. Take good care Bastun and good night. Cassiopeia^(talk) 11:17, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, you have absolutely nothing to apologise for! On the discussion, points, though:

• I accept Sherdog once was a partner of ESPN - in 2007 - but I see no evidence that Sherdog still is a partner of ESPN, as ESPN make no mention of them whatsoever on their current website, except in passing and in articles from several years ago, which is a point you're not addressing.
• Similarly unaddressed is the actual relevance of Sherdog being a partner of ESPN. ESPN don't "own" MMA, they're just a media outlet and content provider. One of thousands.
• I accept that some editors, years ago, on a Wikiproject, decided among themselves that Sherdog would be included in the infobox and would be used for citations. However, I contend that that agreement in no way precludes any editor from including relevant stats, if those stats are backed by reliable sources, even if those sources are not Sherdog. That is absolutely in accordance with standard Wikipedia policy and practice, and a Wikiproject does not get to overrule policy.
• Wikipedia has policies and procedures in place to deal with edit warring. Indeed, these policies and procedures work very effectively, as can be seen with the block yesterday of user Perm, and in the past in blocks for edit warring for two other prominent contributors to this section.
• We (you and I, at least) appear to be going in circles at this point. Perhaps @Drmies and Girth Summit: can bring this to a close at this point, with proper direction? Regards, Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 19:22, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

• Bastun, I think we should leave this to Girth Summit. After all, they're much younger than I am, and they need to atone for having been a devil. FWIW, I agree with your comments about Sherdog in this last post of yours. And I'll add that "having a connection" really doesn't mean a thing--partnering or whatever doesn't make data more reliable, and Sherdog doesn't even have an editorial statement that I can see. So really, I put no stock in them, nor would I if their data came directly from the company that owns all these contests and contracts. You see, I have an opinion, so I shouldn't make the call. Girth Summit, I'm obviously INVOLVED, haha, so it's your turn. Drmies (talk) 20:44, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

I feel as if I should point out that the info re his height has been changed through consensus, so I'm not really sure what else there is to say here. Particularly given the recent and ongoing discussions regarding Sherdog elsewhere.NEDOCHAN (talk) 21:32, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the vote of confidence, Drmies - not sure how much younger than you I can be, but I'll take that as a compliment!

So, my feeling is that the article is now presenting the right figure. I don't have a major problem with Sherdog being used in infoboxes, and I can understand why the MMA project decided to use it widely, but I can't see any way to square it with general content policies to use one source to the exclusion of others. When multiple, generally reliable sources all agree with each other but contradict Sherdog, they should be given precedence - I don't even see a reason to present both figures side by side, since Sherdog appears to be the outlier. As NEDOCHAN has said, this article has now been changed to reflect what I read as the consensus of this thread, even after discounting the views of the blocked editors, and since those blocks were imposed the edit warring has ceased - unless Cassiopeia feels differently, I don't think that anything further needs to be done here - an RfC feels unnecessary, but I'd be willing to draft and participate in one if Cass feels that would be necessary (or even beneficial).

(As an aside, this thread now fills fifteen screens of my laptop - roughly twice the height of the subject of the article, whichever value we go with!) GirthSummit _(blether) 07:35, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

The point here is that when mma infobox was created and Sherdog was used because it was considered a reliable source so no multiple info is added to a as unification. To be partnered with ESPN is just one evidence to show Sherdog is reliable and independent and not the only reason and no editor could provide info if the partnership has ended but at least we know it has been started long time ago. Many editors, casual fans and even admins have never heard about Sherdog, does not make Sherdog not reliable, because Sherdog only cover MMA news and nothing else. Height is not the only info obtained by Sherdog, but also team, fighting out of, weight classes, fight records (very important one), fight method, style, nick name and etc. For those who is not regular mma editors would not know how often and massy mma fighters and event being vandalised or new editors being so distruptive. I would wish to have a discussion and I dont think this talk page is the right venue and it should be in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mixed martial arts as the this effect all mma fighter pages and other mma editor might want to have their opinons heard.Thank you. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:02, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, with respect, I don't understand what you want to discuss here - nobody in this discussion is suggesting the removal of the Sherdog EL from the MMA infobox, or indeed any other changes to this particular infobox. That EL is not presented as a reference to support the assertions in the infobox - it's presented as a source of 'Other information', so it's not contradictory to have some stuff in the box supported by other sources. The subject's height is the only thing this thread has been about - I don't see why bringing up other information supported by Sherdog is relevant. If you indicate that you accept that change, we can leave this here, and anyone who wants to can discuss other aspects of Sherdog elsewhere. GirthSummit _(blether) 08:45, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Girth Summit, The other information supported by Sherdog also is in the infobox which effect thousand of pages. Infoboxe creation started in WikiProject MMA and this is not only one of two pages issues but thousands of thousands pages and not only on height but "other info". Also MMA editors might not place this page in their watchlist and would not know this discussion is talking place. I would think the discussion should be in MMA Project page as it involves all MMA fighters page in Wikipedia. Thank you. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:10, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, I still don't understand your point here - we're talking about one piece of information, on one article - it doesn't affect other articles at all, unless it is your position that we cannot allow information in this infobox to be supported by sources other than Sherdog because Wikiproject MMA has decided that Sherdog is the only acceptable source to use in any MMA infobox - is that what you're saying, or have I misunderstood you? GirthSummit _(blether) 09:26, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Girth Summit, Sherdog is the source for MMA fighter page infobox for those infobox parameters info can be obtain by Sherdog and do note Sherdog was considered to be reliable by Wikipedia in Reliable source discussion where admin did participated. The infobox creation also had admin involved. Any info can not be obtained by Sherdog can be added as long as they are sourced. If the info could be should sourced by to be replaced then it will effect all other MMA fighter pages and we are not talking about height here but many parameters. Editor would be adding different info as per the sources they added which means conflict of info and editing warring would happened, such as height, style, methods, nick name which would effect thousands of thousand pages. Info such as fighting out of could be changed /updated from Sherdog as long as it is sourced, that is same as team; However, height would be subjective to what source you place there, which means a fighter would have 2-4 height info with different sources which I have never since in any other sport person infobox in Wikipedia. That also means the the style can be in any combat sytle as long as the source mentioned the fighter train in xxx martial arts - the thing is as per WikiProject MMA 'MMA fighters requires training several fighting styles, which means that no mixed martial artist uses a single style when fighting. References that describe martial arts ranks (i.e. black belt in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu) and/or martial arts training (i.e. training boxing) are not evidence of fighting style and are not valid to justify a fighting style in an infobox. Do not add your own interpretation of a fighting style. The style parameter should only be used in MMA fighters that have participated professionally or in international competitions in other combat sports (i.e. boxing or kickboxing) and who are notable in said sports and deserve an article for their merits in these other sports (i.e. Antônio Rogério Nogueira, Alistair Overeem). It is suggested to MMA editors that they actively remove the style parameter in infoboxes of MMA fighters that do not meet these criteria." Admin Woody stated they never heard about Sherdog and set the precedent on Handerson page for the height to be changed, and lead this the McGregor. I dont particularly has issue if the problem only effect one or two articles since reliable source is provided but this would be spiral other parameters that is my concern. That is the reason I would suggest the discussion to be placed in MMA WikiProject since this would effect thousands of thousands articles which means all the thousands parmaters for such I think other mma editors shoudl involve the discussion. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:52, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, OK, thanks for setting out your position more fully. My concern is that this is not just an MMA issue, and is not entirely within WikiProject MMA's remit: this is first and foremost a BLP issue, and for any WikiProject to dictate that a particular source is the only acceptable one to use on a certain group of BLP infoboxes seems like overreach. I can understand why one might accept Sherdog as reliable enough to use where other RS don't contradict them; in a situation where multiple other generally reliable mainstream sources contradict it though, I can't see how mandating Sherdog in the face of them is compliant with our content policies and guidelines. I had a quick look at the MMA project's archive to see if I could find discussions where this position had been thrashed out, but searching for 'Sherdog' throws up too many results to trawl through.

My suggestion is this - the preponderance of RS say that he is 5'9", only Sherdog says that he's 5'8": project-wide content policies tell us that we should say he's 5'9". If you can live with that, we can draw a line under this - I'm not interested in making a fuss about other pages.

If you think that a wider discussion is necessary, we can have that, but WikiProject MMA is not the place - it would need to be somewhere more central (e.g. BLPN), because this goes beyond any particular WikiProject's remit. Such a discussion would not be 'Is Sherdog reliable?', it would need to be 'Is Sherdog so uniquely reliable that it is acceptable to mandate its exclusive use on a bunch of BLPs, so much so that we automatically reject reliable sources that contradict it?' MMA editors would be welcome to contribute to such a discussion, and their experience and insight would be valuable, but theirs should not be the only voices in a matter of content and sourcing on BLPs. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 10:24, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, partnering with an entertainment company means NOTHING for reliability, let alone "independence". I mean, "partnering" is kind of the opposite of "independence, is it not? Girth Summit, I think the whole "should we use Sherdog as the basis for the infobox" is a good candidate for a discussion on the project page, but the first question that needs to be answer, IMO, is for BLPN, and it's the basic discussion of reliability. I mean, participants at BLPN probably don't give a damn about some MMA infoboxes, so let's leave it to them--but I do agree that some basic questions about Sherdog need to be addressed by the wider community, not just by the MMA incrowd. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:07, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Drmies, there's a discussion on-going about Sherdog at RSN, if you want to take a peek. It looks to me at the moment like it's going to arrive at a level 2 'reliable in the absence of anything better' rating - which would kind of preclude the practice of enforcing its use on any infobox even where better sources exist. GirthSummit _(blether) 14:16, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

@Drmies and Girth Summit: Thank you for the message and thank you to take time to have a dioglog with me. Appologies that I have to keep on providing some mma history/background for it would be a little easy to understand where I come from. ESPN signed contract to used Sherdog content for their publishe article in 2007 (source provide on this message thread previously) , which mean the info they publishe was from Sherdog. ESPNis considered reliable source, and if they use Sherdog content that would make Sherdog reliable source. Also Sherdgo was voted a reliable source in Wikiipedia RSN years ago. ESPN signed a 7 year (5+2) with UFC in 2019 to have the to broacroast all their events/fights from 2020 -2026 and hired ex UFC fighters and reportors and MMA fighting reportor, Ariel Helwani, to set up their mma department to produce their own database and content. As such Sherdog has always been indepedent from UFC and considered reliable. We have already unusual increase of change fighter height without source in inbox this few days and I am not sure it has anything to do with this message being seen my some IP editors and McGregor page has a very high tranffic in Wikipedia, as he is one of the highest pay althetles in recent years, especially he just annouced he is planning to return to have a fight in Jan 2021 with Dustin Poirier. Anyone can check Sherdog web site to read their content and would see Sherdog meets in term of content/tone/NPOV, WP:RSEDITORIAL and WP:SOURCEDEF. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi CASSIOPEIA, I realise all of that - it's been mentioned before, several times in this thread. I haven't seen you address the concerns people have about it. For me, these are:

• We know that ESPN signed a contract to use Sherdog's content in 2007 - that was a long time ago, we have no way of knowing whether or not it is still in effect. I do not say that it is not; I merely say that we have nothing recent to tell us that it is.
• Potentially more importantly, the fact that Source A (a reliable source) uses information drawn from Source B does not automatically mean that Source B is reliable - Source A might use the information selectively, or add a layer of fact checking, or aggregate multiple sources, or be more willing to correct errors when discovered, or be better in any of the other characteristics that we use to assess sources. To coin a phrase, reliability is not inherited.
• I've already said to you that the previous RSN discussion doesn't count for much. It was poorly attended (one person asked a question, there were only three responses, one of which was quite half-hearted in its support), there was no formal closure, and it took place when Sherdog was operated by a different publisher. All of the sources listed at WP:RSP as 'generally reliable' have had multiple discussions at RSN, demonstrating a much stronger consensus than this - I don't think we can say anything more from that single discussion than 'a couple of people thought it was OK back in 2011'.
• People making unsourced changes to biographical details is a perennial problem, but they can be reverted and warned about unsourced changes. What I'm concerned about is people coming along in good faith and making changes with sources that are generally reliable - it's not OK to revert and warn them without discussion, even if they're IPs or new accounts, that's classic WP:BITE, it goes against our principals of 'anyone can edit'. All of these articles are BLPs, and we have lots of tools at our disposal - including discretionary sanctions - to stop disruption. Do you really think that mandating a specific source to the exclusion of all others is proportionate to the threat? GirthSummit _(blether) 08:58, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Girth Summit, well, even we dont look at the case Sherdog was the partered content of ESPN, I believe Sherdog still meet the reliable source criteria. I dont think it is a bite when an editor add/changing a content without source as an unsouced message is placed on the talk page for to meet WP:V as it is a information and educational message. The issue is edit warring, just like this one and we see how many unplesant messages ened up in so many talk pages. Many new editors would go to extra lenght to change/add/argue about a fighter height, country of origin, ethincity, fighting style and etc just because the fighting is from their coutnry/same heritage/riding a hype train fo a particular prospects. It is difficult to make you nor anyone understand how bad the situation has been if they are not an mma editor editors. I have more than 1k mma related articles in my wathchlist, so I do have a some observation. I have written about 1000 times the same messages to new editors for the past 3 years and a small group are good faith editors and turn regular mma editors but majority are not. I have written more than 10 times to an editor of Wikipedia gudilines for a year, and yet they still do want they want and I am not the fancy to bring anyone to ANI for it is an emotional charge environment. My hope to that Sherdgo could vote as reliable source in RSD and would open a discussion to used Sherdog as the source in 5 of parmaters (there are over 20 parameters). Thank you. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:38, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, I'm sorry, I'm not sure you read what I wrote. I explicitly said that reverting and warning someone who makes unsourced changes is not a problem; what I'm concerned about is reverting and warning a new good faith editor who makes a change supported by a reliable source - that's would be bitey, and having a rule to the effect that Sherdog is the only permissible source for these parameters would encourage that kind of behaviour.

If most of the disruption is coming from unsourced changes, then having a rule like that is unnecessary - Sherdog is probably reliable enough to justify reverting unsourced changes. The only reason to have such a rule would be to enforce Sherdog against reliably sourced changes, and that seems inherently problematic to me. GirthSummit _(blether) 09:48, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Girth Summit, My apologies, I have read you wrongly. My bad. Most of the changes are either unsourced or they use UFC/ESPN as source which is a primary/not indepent source. We do use UFC as source when we could not find any other source besides UFC such as the fighter stand or reach but we would remove UFC source once we could find a third party source for the same parameters. The thing is edit warring comes from editors using primary, non independent or utube source. It is not to say to use Sherdog to aganist other relaible source but to minimise edit warrings, if sherdog is to vote as reliable source (again), then to use one source is to standalised the source parameters. To measue a person height in different occassions even on the same machine or by the same person might not receive the same result everytime and the best of reliable source would at times make error as well. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 11:08, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, OK thanks. I agree that UFC, as a primary and non-independent source, would be better-avoided; I'm not sure about the relative merits of ESPN and Sherdog, but a good-faith newb who comes along and changes a value based on one or other of those shouldn't be bitten - they should be politely pointed towards an established consensus to use Sherdog in preference over those sources. You might also want to put an edit notice in the infobox template, making that point clear to newbs. That is definitely something that could be done at WikiProject MMA.

So - I don't mind if there there is some general agreement that Sherdog's stats be used in favour of UFC's and/or ESPN's. In this case though, where UFC and ESPN and BoxRec and the Guardian and NBC all say one thing, I can't see a rationale for using a different figure just because it's from Sherdog. Would you be content to draw a line under this particular case, and call it consensus to leave the figures as they are now? GirthSummit _(blether) 11:20, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Girth Summit, The RSD is still open, could we wait until when it is closed? As of now, I am not changing anything on the height of McGregor page. By the way, jus to let you know that there is another editing warring which link this this incident - see here, where the height info is per Fox - see here where Fox was the broacaster for UFC events for 5 years before ESPN took over, and I believe the info was collected during the time they have contract with ESPN so in a way is not independent source. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:55, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, I'm happy to leave this thread open until the RfC at RSN is closed. I see that editor has been blocked for editing warring already - let me know if they cause any disruption after the block expires. GirthSummit _(blether) 10:17, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello , fellow editors we shall have Conor’s height at 5’8 . Reason being is simply that we as mma Wikipedia editors should follow Sherdog with its listing , we will continue to have Sherdog sources even tho some other sources might be more “accurate” but we shall have one source that links all mma pages to avoid edit warring . I know it’s not relevant to bring in other articles in Conor’s talk page but please understand this , one of the first pages we had a problem like this Rise was the Dan Henderson height war . It kept on going until someone had reached the consensus to add a note and explain the difference between those pesky 2 inches (5’11 or 6’1) . I did the exact same thing here . Had 5’8 as his height, but then added a very neat note I shall say on why we used 5’8 and furthermore, Made it clear that 5’9 is used by the ufc and linked the secondary sources past editors have got. I am doing everything I got not to start an edit war but some users without naming them , keep on reverting with not answers and not even a discussion , this goes against the core points to be a good Wikipedia editor.point is I am trying to convince you editors to keep 5’8 with note next to it for all readers to know why we listed him at 5’8 in Wikipedia. One point I should mention is that notes are an excellent way to avoid edit wars . In the end we as wiki editors have the same goal . To make articles more accurate and reliable thanks Wikiman122112 (talk) 14:03, 29 October 2020 (UTC)