Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Art of War 14


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:14, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Art of War 14

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not a notable event. Routine sports coverage for a regional promotion. Event was headlined by a fighter whose primary claim to "fame" was being a TUF alumni. Five of the twelve events ended in a draw and one ended in a no-contest after the cage broke. Only event out of 15 events by this promotion that has a dedicated page. Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 04:57, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions.  — Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 05:03, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep I think some more sources could be used but this is not an unknown MMA event.  There are plenty of fighters there who have experienced top flight mma or kickboxing e.g. Rolles Gracie (of the famous Gracie family), Peter Graham and Rodney Glunder (K-1).  While this event is not as big as some, smaller events have a big role to play in the development of fighters - just because it's not the UFC doesn't make it not worthwhile.  Some fighters end up outside the bigger promotions and work there way back while others are up and coming stars of the future.  I think getting rid of pages on the basis that there are not as notable is incorrect and makes wikipedia less informative rather than more so.  Also as it is a series of events I believe the creator has room to create more pages so it is not so unotable that there was one event and then it was all over jsmith006 (talk) 12:25, 27 June 2011
 * I'm not claiming that the events of smaller promotions aren't worthwhile or even that this event is "unknown." I'm just suggesting that it doesn't meet general notability guidelines or MMANOT. Information about fight outcomes is readily accessible on Sherdog and related sites for interested parties. Wikipedia is not meant to be a repository of all information. Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 20:44, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. Run-of-the-mill. Neutralitytalk 00:57, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete This appears to simply be routine reporting of sports results. Jakejr (talk) 01:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Not a notable event at all. If this is on here then we might as well put all the small regional events with "known" fighters on the card. Wikipedia isn't a sports page. Jahahn (talk) 05:06, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * If the promotion has enough clout to bring in named fighters and manages to put on a series of shows then with the correct sources then why shouldn't it be allowed a page. I agree if the event has no notable fighters and is in the back of a bar or alley somethere then I agree there shouldn't be a page.  I also believe that wikipedia is a place where people can find out information so what we have here is information even if it is a "sports page".  I would like to see the page creator add more pages to the series so it is even more thorough - who knows maybe some of these guys may be on the UFC cards one day and I'd like to be able to use wikipedia to check their early fights not log out and go into Sherdog. jsmith006 (talk) 15:03, 28 June 2011
 * Event pages exist for top-tier organizations, as well as some second-tier organizations (as judged by WikiProject MMA participants). You are certainly invited to make a case for including AOW as a second-tier org on the project talk page. Lack of recognition as such, though, will likely continue to be a criteria supporting deletion. Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 18:28, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Fair enough - nice to be able to discuss this in a rational manner - sometimes it seems things just get nominated for deletion with a (complete) lack of understanding of the sport/style in question. Although I'd rather that the author was given more of a chance to improve on the article rather than a deletion tag being put on it especially when alot of hard work goes into it.    jsmith006 (talk) 22:51, 28 June 2011


 * Delete I found nothing to show this event was notable. I think you can make a case for the promotion, but not this individual event. Papaursa (talk) 03:55, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.