Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/UFC 2: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:23, 6 June 2012 editBearMan998 (talk | contribs)1,190 edits →UFC 2← Previous edit Revision as of 01:39, 7 June 2012 edit undoHasteur (talk | contribs)31,857 edits →UFC 2: You already voted, now scurry back to your den.Next edit →
Line 18: Line 18:


'''Objection to NAC'''. NAC appeared to go based on vote countang and not considering the policy reasons for alternative closures. Request for Administrator evaluation of closure. ] (]) 19:22, 6 June 2012 (UTC) '''Objection to NAC'''. NAC appeared to go based on vote countang and not considering the policy reasons for alternative closures. Request for Administrator evaluation of closure. ] (]) 19:22, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
:'''Comment''' There was nothing stated by editor who made the NAC which would implicitly or explicitly imply it was based on vote counting alone. Several policy reasons for '''Keep''' were given in this discussion. ] (]) 21:23, 6 June 2012 (UTC) :'''Comment''' There was nothing stated by editor who made the NAC which would implicitly or explicitly imply it was based on vote counting alone. Several policy reasons for Keep were given in this discussion. ] (]) 21:23, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:39, 7 June 2012


UFC 2

UFC 2 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

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)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Mtking 12:38, 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) 14:55, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep Would you give it up already? This has been tried over and over again, and every time the consensus is the same: leave the articles alone. They're much easier to track with the format we currently have. Surely they're more important than "America's Next Top Model" - eh? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.55.43.96 (talk) 16:02, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep what looks like all 28 nominations, which appear disruptive to ongoing RFC on the topic. Sufficient coverage in Yahoo and other sources. Insufficient discussion or consensus on mass deletions. Merge to proper year "in UFC events" is possible. Guidelines mentioned by nom do not serve as deletion arguments when other keep arguments exist (based on both GNG and consensus to either keep or merge demonstrated at 5 years of similar debates). This boilerplate summary represents several much deeper issues that such a misguided nom doesn't address. Not watching. JJB 17:55, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
  • 'Keep per JJB. Nominator must also note the existence of my vote on all the AfDs or else.--Milowent • 16:53, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep - I think that Misplaced Pages is better with articles of this sort than without them, the UFC series being the most widely publicized benchmark for MMA. Combining these into collections of events taking place in each year would be fine; whether that would be preferable, I can't say. Wiping these admittedly imperfect articles out en masse isn't the answer to anything, however, and WP would be a worse entity if that were to occur. If the closing administrator needs a policy-based rationale, file this under our time-tested main policy of Ignore All Rules — don't let rules get in the way of improvement of the encyclopedia, use common sense. This will be cut-and-pasted as appropriate due to the cut-and-paste nominations here. Carrite (talk) 02:35, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Delete - No claim is made in the article to any enduring notability (WP:NOT), the results section of the article is not sourced to what you can call reliable sources. In answer to JJB failing WP:NOT or WP:EVENT is reason to delete, have no issue to userfication (or to the MMA project space) to allow for a merge if reliable sources can be found on it. Mtking 03:52, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep WP:POINTy nomination. Simple as that. Gamezero05 05:00, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Objection to NAC. NAC appeared to go based on vote countang and not considering the policy reasons for alternative closures. Request for Administrator evaluation of closure. Hasteur (talk) 19:22, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Comment There was nothing stated by editor who made the NAC which would implicitly or explicitly imply it was based on vote counting alone. Several policy reasons for Keep were given in this discussion. BearMan998 (talk) 21:23, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Categories:
Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/UFC 2: Difference between revisions Add topic