| Revision as of 08:26, 22 December 2012 edit176.254.114.25 (talk)No edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:52, 23 December 2012 edit undoKillswitch Engage (talk | contribs)1,776 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| *'''Merge''' into an omnibus page until it can be established whether the event will be notable or not. The coverage right now is routine, speculation, and fails ]. Once the event gets significant coverage, it can be spun out into its own article. ] (]) 15:48, 21 December 2012 (UTC) | *'''Merge''' into an omnibus page until it can be established whether the event will be notable or not. The coverage right now is routine, speculation, and fails ]. Once the event gets significant coverage, it can be spun out into its own article. ] (]) 15:48, 21 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep''': There is a presumption among anyone with the faintest knowledge of MMA that every UFC event will have a lasting impact. Yes, 11 losses and 11 wins are a lasting impact. ] (]) 08:26, 22 December 2012 (UTC) | *'''Keep''': There is a presumption among anyone with the faintest knowledge of MMA that every UFC event will have a lasting impact. Yes, 11 losses and 11 wins are a lasting impact. ] (]) 08:26, 22 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep''' A championship fight that's been several years in the making, along with two contender fights with major impact on the potential next challenger for the UFC (Ultimate Fighting Championship) Welterweight (170 lbs) Championship. I was even kind enough to put the meanings in brackets, because I'm convinced the originators of this ] have not the foggiest clue as to what they are talking about. ] (]) 03:52, 23 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 03:52, 23 December 2012
UFC 158
- UFC 158 (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, the event is still about three months away, the numerous primary routine sources quoted just cover the announcements of who is going to appear which NOTNEWSPAPER explicitly says "is not a sufficient basis for inclusion in the encyclopedia. There is no attempt in the article to demonstrate what the lasting significance of this event will be, there will I have no doubt be 11 winners and 11 looser but beond that any significance at this stage will be pure speculation.
For the avoidance of doubt this nomination has nothing to do with the events notability or not, as a professional sports event, meeting the WP:GNG is not in doubt, however that is no guarantee of a subjects suitability for an article in an encyclopedia if, as in this case, it fails the inclusion policy. Mtking 11:22, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- Keep: It's an upcoming UFC event. Why delete it and redo it later. Leave it up and people can build on it as information becomes available. At 3 months out, we will start seeing the fight card come together over the next couple weeks. Absolutely silly to try to delete it.Willdawg111 (talk) 15:16, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- Merge An article 2013 in UFC should be created to omnibus this and other UFC event articles not yet ready for stand alone articles. Kevlar (talk) 17:53, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- Delete: It's not even UFC 155 yet, and already we are setting up the card for 158. We don't even know if that's the official card, yet. Wait awhile, and recreate it when it's more sourced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.44.214.85 (talk) 23:03, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- Keep: This event has a title fight that has been years in the making, it will have lasting significance. JonnyBonesJones (talk) 12:23, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
- Keep: This will be more relevant as we get closer to the date no point in deleting it now then remaking it later. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.249.47.202 (talk) 14:05, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:53, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:53, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
- Comment The keep arguments have failed to address issues with this article, particularly in light of other recent AfDs in which future UFC events were deleted. Also the article currently fails WP:SPORTSEVENT due to its lack of well-sourced prose; it has practically no prose. I would advice those wishing to keep the article would do better to write actual prose discussing the background of the event thus far as it would bolster any notability arguments they are attempting to make. --TreyGeek (talk) 13:54, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
- Merge into an omnibus page until it can be established whether the event will be notable or not. The coverage right now is routine, speculation, and fails WP:CRYSTAL. Once the event gets significant coverage, it can be spun out into its own article. CaSJer (talk) 15:48, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
- Keep: There is a presumption among anyone with the faintest knowledge of MMA that every UFC event will have a lasting impact. Yes, 11 losses and 11 wins are a lasting impact. 176.254.114.25 (talk) 08:26, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
- Keep A championship fight that's been several years in the making, along with two contender fights with major impact on the potential next challenger for the UFC (Ultimate Fighting Championship) Welterweight (170 lbs) Championship. I was even kind enough to put the meanings in brackets, because I'm convinced the originators of this Witch hunt have not the foggiest clue as to what they are talking about. Killswitch Engage (talk) 03:52, 23 December 2012 (UTC)