Talk:UFC 113

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the UFC 113 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

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

Lyoto Machida vs. Shogun Rua

First thing first i know it's not Shogun Rua, but I'm to lazy. Second thing why isn't it up there because it is an anounnced bout for UFC 113, I have putted it up many times but it kept on getting taken down so therefore my lazyness just steped in. :p So why is itn't being it up there? C.m1994 (talk) 01:52, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, please try to make sure your posts are readable! It's not announced whatsoever. It's a rumour and a weak one at that. Paralympiakos (talk) 01:54, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have resources and they have both signed on to fight again. C.m1994 (talk) 01:55, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And what resources might they be? I'm sensing bull. Paralympiakos (talk) 01:56, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find them right now but they are from multiple reliable canadian soruces. One of them being from Montreal. C.m1994 (talk) 01:58, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can say "I focus on correcting things I know to be accurate" as many times as you like, but this fight hasn't been confirmed, only rumoured. The fight is months away anyway, so I don't see the rush to add it. Paralympiakos (talk) 02:00, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Told ya. c.m1994 (talk) 11:30, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Goulet

Well...I see all the talk of Shogun vs Lyoto, but it's also on the page there. Not sure where we stand on rumoured bouts.

If we ARE posting them, Goulet has just been pseudo-confirmed: http://www.mmaweekly.com/absolutenm/templates/dailynews.asp?articleid=10284&zoneid=13

If not, disregard --24.36.66.187 (talk) 19:27, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Franklin vs Cote

Where are the rumours coming from about Cote fighting Rich Franklin? Don't think this is even rumoured, much less confirmed... Cote has only stated he would like to fight Franklin, but Franklin had said numerous times in interviews that he was planning on staying at light heavyweight... (Joe8609)

For anyone placing this rumour in the page, search Franklin + surgery. Paralympiakos (talk) 22:57, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

UFC Events...

I think the pages for UFC events (example being UFC 111 or UFC 110 or UFC ###) should have a lot more information other than just announced matchups.

This is a Wikipedia page. People come here for information. I believe it should be our duty to provide all of the information about a particular event as possible. That includes rumors, quotes, announced matchups, etc. If I'm looking for information about UFC 113, I think it should be up to us to share all of the information about it as possible. When I type an event that has yet to happen into the Wikipedia search, I want to know all of the background behind the event, the rumors, some quotes, background on the drama surrounding the event, etc.

There is more to UFC events than strictly who is fighting who. Then once the event has happened, you can have results and the drama, quotes, and all that good stuff that follows. That way you can read everything about the event leading up to it, the actual event, and the aftermath. It would make for a much better page. That is just my two cents. Thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.195.183.235 (talk) 06:52, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question or recommendation to include in page

One thing that most UFC xxx pages have lacked that I've noticed, and I've been a fan for many years would be an updated reference to where tickets can be purchased for the venue until maybe after the venue has either already happened or sold out, etc. But there is no legit reason why not and other references on the Internet, not nearly as nice as the wikis I think do have these references.

I always prefer to check the wiki, I've adopted the format, it's clear and most information is dynamically linked in terms of fighters, Orgs, etc.

So to "those" in charge can we get something like that going. I offer to help contribute myself but I'm a super noob at wiki format, but I'm an IT if that helps.

Thanks,

J

Jbaldini (talk) 23:39, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with that is the potential for it being construed as advertising. In addition, any UFC fans should know the places to go to get tickets, those being ticketmaster or stubhub, which are regularly advertised on UFC programming. Paralympiakos (talk) 23:45, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Poster

See my edit summary for my thoughts. I'm happy to discuss it though if needed. Paralympiakos (talk) 18:13, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it's really not much of an issue for me, but I think it's best for us to be on the correct side of the Wikipedia guidelines. In the past, I've seen us get hit with those reduction requests and if we don't comply with them in sufficient time, the posters get taken down. Due to the MMA project having pretty limited manpower, we should take diligence to avoid those situations whenever possible. In regards to your edit summary comments, I don't think it's appropriate for us to continue to upload them in a large size just because that's been the recent trend.

For users just joining into the discussion, we are talking about this UFC 113 poster that I have uploaded and was subsequently replaced by a larger version. I think this is both unnecessary and not compliant with Wikipedia:Non-free_content#Policy criteria #3b. Lack of compliance with this rule will get us hit with those "reduction request" tags as seen here: [1] [2], and if we don't lower the resolution in time it will result in the removal of the posters altogether. Bad intentionz (talk) 23:59, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not particularly bothered myself; it's just that I find the larger versions better. If it's against rules, then I'd possibly wait for such a request to downgrade res, before changing to the previous version. If you don't think that's a good idea, then do it now, but I think we can wait until it becomes an active problem. Up to the larger consensus. Paralympiakos (talk) 00:02, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kimbo Slice vs. Matt Mitrione

On the UFC 110 PPV, Mike Goldberg said that Kimbo is fighting Matt Mitrione on this card. Update that fight as being official. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.195.183.235 (talk) 03:36, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No. We don't know the placement of the bout. Paralympiakos (talk) 03:38, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was announced officialy at UFC 110 that it's happenning at UFC 113 as one of the main bouts. It was showed during that "next events around the world" thing the UFC is doing in the latest shows. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.222.57.105 (talk) 19:29, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm well aware of that, but is it the first fight? The second fight? The third fight? We can't put it in until it's officially announced on ufc.com, so we know its placement. Paralympiakos (talk) 19:43, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't know where on the card then put it underneath the preliminary fights under a subject named something like 'announced fights'. 68.69.132.13 (talk) 12:27, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah....you're resurrected conversations from nearly two months ago. We know exactly where the fight goes and that is where it is right now....the 2nd fight of the live main card. Paralympiakos (talk) 12:29, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Background

Why are things that happened during the event and after the event under the Background section? 144.118.146.21 (talk) 21:24, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Koscheck v Daley post event details

Removed the part about the knee being a grazing blow. Footage shows that a different knee connected while Kos was shooting in, just before the 'phantom knee'. Also, the sucker punch after the bell was blocked by Koscheck. - Mister Smythe (talk) 16:38, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]