Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UFC on Fox: Evans vs. Davis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Teamsleep (talk | contribs) at 19:22, 23 April 2012. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

UFC on Fox: Evans vs. Davis (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 sports event fails WP:NOTNEWSPAPER policy along with WP:EVENT, WP:SPORTSEVENT and WP:MMAEVENT, there is no attempt in the actual article to demonstrate any lasting significance, the sources are from either before or immediately post the event and are just of the routine coverage type any sports event gets, they are either not independent or from MMA centric websources that lack diversity. This event can, and is, more than adequately covered in 2012 in UFC events. Mtking (edits) 07:16, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Mtking (edits) 07:20, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Are you fucking stupid? Why haven't you nominated BAMMA 7 or, hell, Piloswine for deletion? I disagree with all of your points and so will everyone else. 78.52.240.79 (talk) 11:00, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This article should clearly remain for the following reasons:
It passes GNG. You cite four policies/guidelines why this should be deleted as an exception. My response is as follows:
1) There is nothing in WP:NOTNEWSPAPER you cite to support deletion.
2) You cite WP:EVENT as areason for deletion, which in fact supports the existence of the article. The guideline specifically states that "...An event that is a precedent or catalyst for something else of lasting significance is likely to be notable...]]. It does not refer to the requirement of continued media coverage at all in this regard.
3) It does not fail, as you claim, WP:SPORTSEVENT because that only says "...Some games or series are inherently notable, including but not limited to..." It says nothing about what's not notable, and is therefore not citable as grounds for this AfD.
4) WP:MMAEVENT does not apply because it is an essay.
Furthermore: