Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pride Bushido 4


 * 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   merge to List of Pride Fighting events. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:48, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Pride Bushido 4

 * – ( View AfD View log )

another non notable kickboxing event. this article is merely a results page. 2 gnews hits one of them is MMA which isn't really third party. google just shows event listings. need more coverage than sherdog.com to demonstrate notability. Also nominating:
 * Pride Bushido 1
 * Pride Bushido 2
 * Pride Bushido 3
 * Pride Bushido 5 LibStar (talk) 03:23, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions.  — Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 13:11, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  — Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 13:22, 11 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:06, 18 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep These events were held by Pride FC, the biggest promotion in the history of MMA and featured many notable fights. -- WölffReik (talk) 14:27, 20 July 2011
 * that is not a criterion for notability. Please provide evidence of third party coverage to meet WP:GNG. LibStar (talk) 13:29, 20 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep I dislike articles like these that contain only match results. My difficulty in finding sources to improve the article stems from Pride being a Japanese MMA promotion that held events prior to MMA being popular and reported on by English-speaking media and websites.  I was able to find a couple Yahoo Japan articles on Pride Busiho events .  However, Google is not serving well in translating those articles to something legible in English.  I think that research in Japanese media will find more coverage of the events.  That may require someone who is fluent in Japanese to be able to find material to improve the articles.  --TreyGeek (talk) 04:02, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Pride was certainly a notable organization, but I don't see anything in these articles to show these events are notable. These articles also lack good sources. Even the Japanese articles I found seem to be ordinary sports reports (of course I was using Google translations). 131.118.229.18 (talk) 14:41, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 00:24, 25 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge - The encyclopedia has a list of events put on by Pride Fighting Championships, the list is List of Pride Fighting events.  There is also  a footer template that lists them all at Template:Pride Events.   A question for the nominator is:  Why have these particular five bushido events been singled out for deletion?  There are 13 Bushido events:  do the other 8 bushido events have more notability?   In any case, it would be nice if all 13 Bushido articles (they go up to Pride Bushido 13) were treated uniformly.  Perhaps they could all be merged into a single article that covers all 13?  --Noleander (talk) 00:40, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge all 13 Pride Bushido events into one entry? Agreed.  Mr  JM 02:38, 25 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete The individual articles are nothing but fight results (not notable, I'd say). So you want to combine the results of several hundred fights into 1 giant list of fights? Astudent0 (talk) 16:46, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep At the time, Pride FC was one of the most notable mixed martial arts promotions in the world and the most notable in Japan (the country where many combat sports originated). Currently, all Pride events have their own page. The notability of its major events are well established, and given the limited number of its minor events and the fact that the promotion is now defunct (so documenting future events isn't an issue), it doesn't make sense to me to delete an arbitrary handful of events - doing so would leave gaps in what is now a complete record on WP of this promotions history. What would be the point of deleting these few articles, which would ultimately leave five red links in a comprehensive template listing the nearly 70 events held by this promotion? It seems that the value of retaining these pages outweighs any value in deleting them, or trying to merge all 13 articles into a monster sized mess. Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 05:25, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
 * "The notability of its major events are well established" i disagree, where is the evidence of indepth third party sources to meet WP:GNG. LibStar (talk) 23:58, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Anyone familiar with the history of mixed martial arts competitions will note immediately just how silly that statement is. Thanks very much for the chuckle. :-) Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 02:59, 29 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge all to List of Pride Fighting events (which I'm glad to see was recently moved) as clearly failing WP:GNG by lacking diversity of sources. WP:ROUTINE sports event results by reputable Sherdog and a link to the promoter's site doesn't constitute significant coverage in multiple independent sources. Adding the meager sources from this page would improve the target significantly. All five fail WP:EVENT in every aspect. Sorry to invoke WP:OTHERSTUFF, but we've deleted dozens of like events this month which had better sourcing than these five. Any assertion about notability would better serve the pagespace by adding relevant citation to the page, instead of making sweeping statements NOT based on policy. There's nothing here to keep, even if closer made that assessment of consensus. BusterD (talk) 00:17, 2 August 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.