Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UFC 149: Aldo vs. Koch (2nd nomination)

UFC 149: Aldo vs. Koch

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/UFC 149: Aldo vs. Koch
• Articles for deletion/UFC 149: Aldo vs. Koch (2nd nomination)

UFC 149: Aldo vs. Koch (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)

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

This event fails WP:NOT and WP:EVENT as there is no indication that the event it's self will have any enduring notability. Any claim to such is at best speculation for an event still two months away. The coverage it has to date is limited to the routine type of event announcements. Mtking ^(edits) 20:02, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Merge This article was recently discussed for a potential merge/redirect on the talk page but was shouted down for many non-policy reasons. It makes sense to merge to a 2012 in UFC Events (or 2012 in UFC Numbered events). Hasteur (talk) 20:15, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

• delete/merge crystal ball and routine coverage only, including likely only routine coverage after the event. These events occur every month, they are not way notable or of lasting significance, even within the sport. This event will be washed away next month by the next event. If something signficant happens in this event that recieves real non-routine coverage, then it should be split. not before. Gaijin42 (talk) 20:44, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

• Using this logic, the NFL and MLB pages should be a long and unwieldy list of games, until some just happen to make it to some arbitrary threshold of non-routine. Worth noting nominator's definition of non-routine is approximately "changes the face of the world forever". Agent00f (talk) 05:43, 19 May 2012 (UTC)— Agent00f (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

• Keep This event happened to sell out, i'd say that makes it inherently notable. JonnyBonesJones (talk) 01:00, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Lots of football, basketball, and baseball games sell out. Or more direclty analagous, boxing matches. That doesnt make that individual game/match notable. This one either. Gaijin42 (talk) 01:31, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 12:28, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 12:28, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

• Keep Per WP:SPORTSEVENT, this is headlined by a championship contest at the highest level of the sport. Agent00f (talk) 05:43, 19 May 2012 (UTC)— Agent00f (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • I would like to disagree. The championship clause seems to suggest that the entire game of the championship is the notable unit. To apply this to an event where the championsip is 1/9th of the entire event does not, in my mind, apply at the same level. I also note that the championship clause is for annual championships. The championship contest to headline the fight was already challenged once this year, so I do not think that the championship clause makes sense. Hasteur (talk) 06:33, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
    • Ok, so let's start listing contests individually instead of grouping them by card/event. Then we can split out just the championship contest later (I'll make sure to watch it and write some "prose" about who hit whom and why, I ensure you I can produce TLDR prose). Or we can stop all this massive busywork for very questionable gain and leave a very clean and well designed format as it is. Also, it might be notable to someone not familiar with the sport that two championship contests is about the most a top level fighter can do per year. Two seems in the ballpark of one. Agent00f (talk) 06:43, 19 May 2012 (UTC)— Agent00f (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
      • Hint: You were not supposed to rebut that. In no way does splitting these out into the individual fights make sense. Your response only demonstrates a lack of understanding of how WP works. My response was polite, used modifiers to suggest it was only my thoughts, and explained reasonably why I believed the championship clause did not make sense. No response is ever necessary to this hint to you. Hasteur (talk) 07:00, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
        • With further introspection, I thank you for bring to my attention that these were separate contests between unaffiliated fighters mistakenly combined into this "event". Coincidental overlap in location (and not in time) isn't specified in the rules as a valid reason for combining distinct contests, and to fix this it may be best to break down these mistakenly created "events" into contest entries. Those seem up for individual AfD nomination since they seem to lack prose and fail GNG per broad wiki consensus. However, your request that "events" "make sense" doesn't take priority over the clear wording. Per nominator and many other editor's clear precedent on this topic we should carefully follow a consistent interpretation of WP:SPORTSEVENT. This is a polite request to respect clear higher level consensus instead of deferring to arbitrary inner-sport rules. For example, the words "champion of a top league" is quite clear, and 1/year limit is not specified. Thanks. Agent00f (talk) 07:54, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict × 3) Please demonstrate (by quoting sources) that your claim that being headlined by this companies "championship" will mean it recives coverage demonstrating enduring notability. Otherwise it is just your opinion. Mtking ^(edits) 07:02, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Please specify what would be acceptable as sources or evidence before goalposts start moving. Thanks. Agent00f (talk) 07:42, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Looking at the rules more carefully: "Some games or series are inherently notable, including but not limited to the following" seems pretty clear. Otherwise "championships" in sport generally show no "enduring notability" due to their "routine" occurrence and this rule is rather pointless. We should seek wider input from sports and event voices so that his ambiguity can be resolved with some clarity before rushing to conclusions. This exampleof nomination by same user for same kind of sports event seems to attract differing opinions (and likely different results) despite not even fulfilling any kind of WP:SPORTSEVENT requirement. These types of AfDs shouldn't just be arbitrarily decided in each instance or it would just be entirely confusing what belongs and what doesn't even in the same subject. Agent00f (talk) 08:03, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I ask again can you demonstrate by quoting sources that a UFC championship fight, which occur on average once a month, is such an event that receives coverage demonstrating enduring notability, because if you can't it is still just your opinion. Mtking ^(edits) 08:07, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Your requests makes no sense since a very clear reading of WP:SPORTSEVENT describes certain events as inherently notable. Those words of the rule are not simply an "opinion" unless all wiki rules are merely "opinions". Please note this in the relevant rule pages if that's the new interpretation, though you may want to discuss such a change on their respective talk page. Agent00f (talk) 08:14, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

the part of WP:SPORTSEVENT you are appearing to rely on is "The final series (or single game when there is not a series) determining the champion of a top league, e.g. 2009 Stanley Cup Finals, or Super Bowl XLIII, or 2006 UEFA Champions League Final" so correct me if I am wrong by as the UFC is not a league this can not apply. So the question is relevant. Mtking ^(edits) 08:45, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Please read your link carefully: "individuals to compete against "each other in a nonrandom order on a set schedule, usually called a "season," with the results of the individual competitions being used to name an overall champion". In the UFC, contestants do compete with each other, in a nonrandom order (for example, contestants win against opponents of their own level on the way to becoming title contender), the schedule are the events you're nominating, and the overall champion part is obvious.

• Delete Some editors dont like UFC and I think we should do what they say. Portillo (talk) 08:17, 19 May 2012 (UTC)