Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UFC 11


 * 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   no consensus. T. Canens (talk) 17:00, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

UFC 11

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This event fails WP:NOT, WP:EVENT, WP:SPORTSEVENT, and WP:NOTNEWSPAPER as there is no indication that the event has any enduring notability and lasting significance. Portillo (talk) 09:23, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Per WP:SPORTSEVENT, this event determined the champion of a top league so it satisfies the notability guideline. BearMan998 (talk) 21:37, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

THESE PAGES BRING NUMEROUS HITS TO YOUR SITE EACH MONTH; THESE ARE MY ONLY VISITS TO WIKIPEDIA. DELETE THEM, I'LL NEVER RETURN. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.189.143.31 (talk) 02:25, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * You might want to talk a look at this site. Unscintillating (talk) 22:31, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. TreyGeek (talk) 15:15, 19 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Note to closer- This AfD was not listed in the deletion log, I have added it now. Monty  845  05:34, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 01:58, 9 July 2012 (UTC)




 * Weak delete - Without multiple, independent, reliable sources to corroborate BearMan's claim, I don't see how this event was notable. /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 03:19, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep This is a notable top event in it's sporting event, just because you don't watch or like this particular sport doesn't mean it should be deleted, this is like me AFDing the superbowl because I don't like American Football, ridiculous nom Seasider91 (talk) 14:40, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep We have articles for all the UFCs because they all crown a champion per BearMan998. This may need to be referenced better, but that's no reason to delete it outright. --Bachrach44 (talk) 18:30, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment It's not true that all UFC events crown a champion. 131.118.229.18 (talk) 15:42, 10 July 2012 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:53, 17 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - major event per WP:SPORTSEVENT. Zujua (talk) 07:47, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep all - These are major events as everybody else has said. There are also huge procedural nightmares about how these serial nominations were done: they should all have been done in one individual AfD. I AGF but the noms are absolute non starters. Should be SNOW KEEP by now. Shadowjams (talk) 22:07, 17 July 2012 (UTC)


 * If UFC 11 is a "major event", why is there not one single contemporaneous newspaper article available? Do you agree that the event fails WP:EVENT?  Unscintillating (talk) 22:31, 22 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete and redirect to List of UFC events: No evidence that the UFC 11 has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources to presume that it meets general notability guideline. All coverage of the event falls into routine coverage, so the article can only be at best a news report, thus it is unsuitable as a topic since it fall into what Wikipedia is not. Also, at that point in time the UFC was unregulated, it is not a sports league and the event itself did not receive significant non-routine coverage, so I do not think that it meets the sports notability criteria for individual games or series. That guideline does not exempt the article from having to comply with the what Wikipedia is not policy either. Jfgslo (talk) 04:24, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment The keep !votes seem focused on an alleged championship, but there is no championship mentioned in the article.  There was not even a fight in the finals of the tournament, the opponent complained of "fatigue", an alternate had a broken hand, and a winner was declared by forfeit.  WP:SPORTSEVENT states, Note that all of the examples listed are team sports.  The counter-argument being passed around is that all UFC sports events deserve the status of the Stanley Cup Finals or the SuperBowl.  Why should every event of one small company (Zuffa or SEG), get more coverage on Wikipedia than major league baseball?  How is this is a "single game" that has determined the "championship of a top league" that is the equivalent of the Super Bowl or the Stanley Cup Finals?  That would have been huge news if a Superbowl were won by forfeit.  I've clicked on dozens of links at Google without finding any 1996 newspaper articles or even any secondary reliable coverage of any kind about the event, with one exception at yahoo.sports.com/mma.  One can tell by the almost non-existant media coverage that the world at large does not consider this event to have the status of the Stanley Cup Finals or the Superbowl.  Unscintillating (talk) 22:31, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete and redirect to List of UFC events Article is totally unsourced, so it fails WP:V and there is nothing to consider for merging.  As per WP:BURDEN, all of the body of this article needs to be removed.  The nominator correctly notes that the topic fails WP:EVENT, for example, given the absence of contemporaneous reports, the coverage doesn't even rise to the level of routine coverage.  sports.yahoo.com/mma has a web report filed in 2009 possibly created by watching a video, so it seems credible that the event exists.  sports.yahoo.com/mma routinely provides a web page for every UFC event.  WP:EVENT states, "Notable events usually have significant impact over a wide region, domain, or widespread societal group." and "Significant national or international coverage is usually expected for an event to be notable."  Balloon boy incident is sometimes mentioned as a WP:EVENT benchmark.  Finally, our WP:NOT policy states, "routine news reporting on things like...sports...is not a sufficient basis for inclusion in the encyclopedia."  Unscintillating (talk) 22:31, 22 July 2012 (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.