Talk:UFC on ESPN: Overeem vs. Harris

Requested move 15 May 2020

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: not moved. Only the nom and one opposer commented, and the nom is a sock. --Mdaniels5757 (talk) 22:29, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

UFC on ESPN: Overeem vs. Harris → UFC on ESPN 8: Overeem vs. Harris – The UFC events affected by the COVID-19 pandemic has not been on the rail lately on Wikipedia. I temporarily seeking to suspend "individual/personal research" and to proposal a plan to address the issue to heavily depend on reliable facts for event name and some information for those events affected by COVID-19 padnemic. I proposed a rm to have title change to UFC on ESPN 8: Overeem vs. Harris. Facts Regice2020 (talk) 22:49, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * UFC events that are not PPVs are not officially numbered. You can redirect UFC on ESPN 8 to this article, but naming it "UFC on ESPN X: Someone vs. John Doe" does not follow the pattern for those events, just like PPV events do not have the main event on the title article. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 12:34, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Merge with UFC on ESPN: Ngannou vs. Rozenstruik
support for UFC on ESPN 8 and redirect to UFC on ESPN: Overeem vs. Harris and UFC on ESPN: Ngannou vs. Rozenstruik merge to UFC on ESPN: Overeem vs. Harris same as UFC 249 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cassiopeia (talk • contribs) 01:59, 16 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Merge with UFC on ESPN: Ngannou vs. Rozenstruik. That event is UFC on ESPN 8. In my opinion, we need to do many more merges on these UFC articles. Rename "to" article to include the main event. Fbdave (talk) 22:55, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Support -  Merge with UFC on ESPN: Ngannou vs. Rozenstruik.  That event is UFC on ESPN 8. For those who oppose pls note the the numbering background and Wikipedia policy here: besides UFC PPV event the numbering is set by UFC (such as UFC 200), the rest of the numbering come from the medias. The reason is that without knowing who are the headliners for the event, the medias need to set up a systematic numbering identify the event (can't use city name as same cities have held UFC event and dates are hard to remember),  for such the named UFC Fight Night XXX or UFC on ESPN xxx or UFC on ESPN+ XXX UFC on FOX xxx. When we create an article we need to support the content with sources and if the sources state UFC Fight Night 166 then we state  UFC Fight Night 166 and use UFC Fight Night 166 as the article title until the headliners are confirmed close to the event date then we moved the page to the headliners event name and UFC Fight Night 166 or any other names (also known as XXX)  will be redirect to the official headliners name. This is important as an unsourced or source doest not support the content article could not meet the notability guidelines for venerability / WP:PROVEIT is the core policies of Wikipedia and without it we cant even create the articles. In short WP:PROVEIT / verifiability triumphs all reasons for it is the core policy. Without the supporting sources no Wikipedia article exists.


 * UFC on ESPN 8 and redirect to UFC on ESPN: Overeem vs. Harris and UFC on ESPN: Ngannou vs. Rozenstruik merge to [UFC on ESPN: Overeem vs. Harris same as UFC 249 irregardless if the date and venue has change or the headlines has change as it is normal practice for events to have such incidents in the past and we just add in the text stating why the event info was changed just like UFC 249. This is different from the past cancelled events ( all of them are UFC PPV event except one UFC Fight Night: Lamas vs. Penn / UFC Fight Night 97), all the numbering retired) and event numbering were not use by media for later events. However, the this and the rest of the UFN/UFC on ESPN the media do reuse the numbering for future events for we cant have 2 events using the same UFN numbering for the are the same event just with more changes due to covid-19. For such the current numbering system stays. As for the merging suggestion of COVID-19 effected page that will be merged to the designated planned event numbering by the media. Cassiopeia(talk) 05:59, 16 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose - I do not support merging the articles because they are not the same event. If Regice2020's quest works, the redirect articles could be merged indeed. But those events that were cancelled should then be moved to titles like Cancelled UFC event on April 25, 2020 so they can be left as they were originally. It's not the same thing as UFC 249. If media this time decided to jump the numbering (unlike they did in the past) and we go by that on ordering events, I'm fine with it. But we can't merge events that are not the same. When the UFC does move an event to another location and date, we do find sources to that (like UFC 249). We could remove the "also known" as from them and just leave them be. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 12:27, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * To make it easier: Oppose merging this article with UFC on ESPN: Ngannou vs. Rozenstruik. / Oppose moving it to UFC on ESPN 8: Overeem vs. Harris / Support merging UFC on ESPN 8 with this article and leaving UFC on ESPN: Ngannou vs. Rozenstruik as it is. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 12:34, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * "If Regice2020's quest works" Such comment. There no quest. A reliable fact was presented during the special case and not same as the "old cancelled" UFC events. This same exact case as the UFC 249 merge ...UFC 250 was replaced with UFC 249. It was postponed. No messy redirect and editors can simply add sourced one row sentence to background stated it was "suppose take place that date". Opposing this will simply verify that this specific info is nothing but a misinformation content. This simple easy that would of been resolved without question.

Another note, that COVID-19 issue affected all WP Pages up to UFC 251. Regice2020 (talk) 17:41, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * This is not the same thing as UFC 249 (just like you tried to add "Gaethje vs. Ferguson" to the article's title). This is pretty clear. What is being discussed is media not numbering the events that were cancelled and going back to what they would be numbered if they were not cancelled. We keep the cancelled events alone and keep the number for the new ones. Therefore we keep history correct when it comes to the timeline of events. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 20:11, 16 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose per WP:V, WP:SYN - No sources have been shown covering news about the May 16 event together with that of the planned March 28 event, referring to or otherwise treating them as the same subject. Presenting them as the same subject based on having been referred to by the same unofficial name at different times is a synthetic claim, "drawing inferences from multiple sources to advance a novel position", a form of original research which is "prohibited by the NOR policy." Dancter (talk) 01:58, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per above. 94.179.245.243 (talk) 12:19, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose same reasons as above Livingston 01:24, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Merge with UFC Fight Night: Overeem vs. Harris

 * Merge with UFC Fight Night: Overeem vs. Harris . Similar as two different UFC Fight Night: Smith vs. Teixeira events were merged.  82.207.105.66 (talk) 23:47, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose - As mentioned above, they are not the same event. The original event that was supposed to have the Smith/Teixeira bout is here. The same thing could be done here, but they are not broadcast by the same media so the titles are different. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 12:27, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Because it was reverted again . If so, I struck my vote. 82.207.105.66 (talk) 01:10, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Per WP:RS If no reliable sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it. <-- This core policy would be heavily active to address the issue if this RM does not pass. The RM was to address  this special case were same and changed event was postponed to later date.Regice2020 (talk) 21:12, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * And where does it say that a ESPN+ cancelled event is the same as a ESPN event in a different date, location and most of the fights? Just because they picked the same two guys to headline? Gsfelipe94 (talk) 22:48, 16 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Merge with UFC Fight Night: Overeem vs. Harris Merging makes more sense than a name change.-- Rockchalk 717 21:38, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose - If these events were either being held a) at the same venue as originally intended. or b) with the same headliners, then would support the idea that they are the same event. But these are new events, being created at new venues drawing matchups from various other cards. The fact they are being held in entirely different states with different headliners says its a new event. Dimspace (talk) 01:42, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 *  All opinions are welcome but it has to based on Wikipedia guidelines after all this is Wikipedia. We cant have same "sourced" on two different event names. This event (this page/title name) did not happened (it was planned) so no such event existed actually'''.
 * As normal practice/and I have stated, it should be all included (info) in one page in regardless the date/venue/headliners changed as it is the norm in mma events. UFC President Dana White and UFC said many things, not all were happened as was as per what was mentioned. In regardless anyone/editor opinions or favour/not favour "unsourced content", verifiability and WP:PROVEIT is the core Wikipedia policy (WP:LOP) and not only guidelines and that is not negotiable here, for without following it that means is no Wikipedia and no Wikipedia means no articles. Articles content of the article need to be supported by WP:secondary, reliable sources to meet the notability guidelines for article in Wikipedia and UFC is the primary source and can NOT be use to support/demonstrate the notability of the article. If anyone want to change the Wikipedia policy then go to Village pump (proposals) and state your case. Do note this is Wikipedia here and Wikipedia ALL about verifiablility and is not about But it's true!. And if all covid-19 events pointed to the same source that there should all be merged which I believe we have 4/5 pages/event effected as the as per date. Note to closing admin/editor on the sourced content. Cassiopeia(talk) 02:53, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Just because an event was cancelled, it doesn't mean it did not exist or should not be noticed on an article of their own. Sources are clear when it comes to events that were cancelled and events that happened, they do not merge because somebody decided to use the same number for a FN event or something similar. So we need to delete all previously cancelled events and find somewhere to merge them, just like every other event (music, sports, anything else) that was cancelled because they "did not exist". Gsfelipe94 (talk) 04:31, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * (1) the event did not happened (the headliners) but changed to other headlines so it can state in one articles instead of two (2) "they do not merge because somebody decided to use the same number for a FN event or something similar" are sources from independent, reliable sources, which is the core policy to meet notability and not UFC (primary source) that is how Wikipedia works. In another words, independent, reliable sources (press) that support the content is what Wikipedia is all about and not the info from the primary source (UFC). Cassiopeia(talk) 04:49, 17 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Support if move fails It more sense. Regice2020 (talk) 05:42, 30 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment - Just letting everybody know that User:Regice2020 is a sock puppet account and has been blocked indefinitely. Should we finally move on? Gsfelipe94 (talk) 05:42, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

poster
please add posters — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eze jeffrey (talk • contribs) 15:06, 23 May 2020 (UTC)