Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UFC 73


 * 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   keep. The Bushranger One ping only 01:23, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

UFC 73

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Routine sports event, lack of recent coverage suggest a lack of lasting significance. Claritas § 10:45, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - Is notable, 2 titles were defended at this event. Anderson Silva also fought at this event, it has lasting significance. JonnyBonesJones (talk) 14:54, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - This article along with many other MMA event articles are part of a developing omnibusing project within the MMA WikiProject. At the moment preserving the content of this article is important to that project. As the project moves forward this will more than likely be deleted unless it clearly meets the RfC'd guidelines for stand-alone event articles. The full discussion can be found on the MMA wikiproject talk page.Thaddeus Venture (talk) 16:10, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - Per Thaddeus Venture's argument. --LlamaAl (talk) 04:22, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 04:30, 19 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep: I don't know if it matters to anybody, but happened to be looking through some MMA forums, and people are upset about the amount of articles being deleted on Wikipedia because they like to use it as a source as reference. http://www.sherdog.net/forums/f2/wiki-deleted-ufc-155-event-2257217/ Wiki operates off of donations and if people aren't coming to wiki, they won't be getting donations. How about we stop trying to delete everything and work on improving it. Willdawg111 (talk) 04:37, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge an article 2007 in UFC should be created to omnibus this and other UFC event articles not yet ready for stand alone articles. There is no sourced prose in the article about how it effected anything after the event. Kevlar (talk) 17:47, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - I'm generally in favor of having standalone articles for UFC events at which titles are defended, per WP:SPORTSEVENT, since they determine the champion of a top league, which I consider UFC to be. I do admit it's a bit of a struggle to find good sources for the event after the fact, though.  Yahoo has some coverage, but I couldn't find much else. CaSJer (talk) 20:50, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:15, 19 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment This would be an article to potentially keep, due to its two championship bouts, if it weren't for its sad state. The article is dominated by fight results, payout results, and bonus award results. Therefore, it fails WP:SPORTSEVENT which requires that "notable games should have well-sourced prose, not merely a list of stats". If the article had its prose fleshed out to discuss the background of the event, what occurred during the event, and the after-effects of the event, then I would have little issue !voting keep. Otherwise, in it's current state, I would merge it into an omnibus article such as 2007 in UFC events.  --TreyGeek (talk) 14:07, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails the WP:NOT policy, it a professional sports event that only received routine news coverage. Like TreyGeek and Kevlar suggest content could be merged into a "2007 in UFC events" article, but as one does not exist can't !vote for that however no prejudice to a restore for the purpose of a munge and redirect to such an article. Mt  king (edits) 02:27, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 01:50, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge, as per Kevlar above. 1292simon (talk) 02:37, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per Willdawg111. I'm not sure why all these AfD's are necessary.  Automatic Strikeout  ( T •  C) 04:37, 28 December 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.