Deletion of Dakota Ditcheva

Comment: It's clear that  is not met. I happen to agree with those who also don't believe that  is met
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NKICK||WP:GNG)

Comment: just to clarify a few things, some of the above editors who are suggesting delete state Ditcheva does not meet , which as i have stated before is not surprising as this sng (as with the other sports sngs) covers professionals.  But it also says "Kickboxers that have an amateur background exclusively are not considered notable unless(my emphasis) the person has been the subject examined in detail (more than a single paragraph) in several reliable third-party sources (at least four), excluding local publications." The article presently has more then 4 references that meets this. Editors also have not answered the proposition that as the junior world IFMA champion she meets  as having "participated in a major international amateur or professional competition at the highest level". (so one of the statements above that "Neither junior nor amateur championships meet notability criteria" is not necessarily correct.)  Also, another statement "(apart from BBC and Daily Mirror) The rest of the references are from local news." is also misleading, Elle UK is a national magazine, Messenger Newspapers represent the North-West of England, the Manchester Evening News "is a regional daily newspaper", Sport England is a national body, and IFMA is the governing body for amateur Muaythai world wide, so actually none of the references presently cited in the article are "local
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NKICK||WP:SPORTCRIT)

Comment: Looking at the last sentence of , there are some third-party sources, such as BBC and Daily Mirror, but isn't quite enough for an amateur kickboxer to establish notability. The rest of the references are from local news. I think this article will reappear eventually, but as it stands I think it's 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NKICK||WP:TOOSOON)

Comment: per  (which trumps ) and Google News https://www.google.com/search?q=Dakota+Lili-Joa+Ditcheva&oq=Dakota+Lili-Joa+Ditcheva&aqs=chrome..69i57.473j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#tbm=nws&q=Dakota++Ditcheva 1. Article could use expansion, not deletion per 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NKICK||WP:ATD)

Comment: Sources in article currently meet the 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: this has got to be a "keep", look how cute her pigtails are - http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/real-life-stories/nextrondarousey-british-teenager-inspired-ufc-7086817{{=)}}, c'mon coola, just because a subject is cute, doesn't mean they are notable, remember the cute pics at Wikipedia:List of really, really, really stupid article ideas that you really, really, really should not create|no articles for these, oh, thats right, now to the serious bit; nom states that Ditcheva does not meet  which is not surprising as she has only just turned professional and has come to notice as an amateur, winning multiple International Federation of Muaythai Amateur|IFMA world (junior) championships she may meet  as having "received a well-known and significant award or honor" and   - "are likely to meet Wikipedia's basic standards of inclusion if they have, for example, participated in a major international amateur or professional competition at the highest level (such as the Olympics).", as the IFMA "is the sole recognised sport governing body of amateur Muaythai" (from lead of its wikiarticle) Ditcheva would seem to meet this criteria, so this is a "keep
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NKICK||WP:ANYBIO||WP:SPORTCRIT)

Comment: I have moved the article back to its place in the mainspace to allow this AFD to proceed. It was being moved all over the place by different editors which was disrupting this AFD. The article cannot be speedily deleted under  because a number of other editors have worked on the article. Additionally, it shouldn't be userified to contravene an AFD outcome because the author simply disagrees with the other editors. The ''purpose'' of userfying drafts is that so the author can work on the article to get it up to our inclusion criteria -- and not to grant them another opportunity to try again later. Maybe the article meets the criteria now; maybe it does not. That's why we have discussions like this and interrupting the process is ''not'' going to help in the community making that determination. I have advised {{u|Marvellous Spider-Man}} that they can request the article be moved to their userspace after the AFD at  or put their request in here for review by the closing admin
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion (WP:G7||WP:REFUND)

Comment: As now there is support from established editor, I will say that, due to strong  sources given above, she easily passes 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:GNG)