Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/K-1 World Grand Prix Selection 2010

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. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 17:00, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

K-1 World Grand Prix Selection 2010

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

also nominating:

Another useless series of fighting qualifying results that fail WP:SPORTSEVENT for lack of third party coverage. Most competitors are non notable. LibStar (talk) 14:08, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:02, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete All. Couple of primary company sources. The odd WP:ROUTINE results report. And that's about it. If anyone can unearth substantial independent WP:RS sources, happy to look again, but seems like another total failure to pass WP:GNG or WP:SPORTSEVENT. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 21:27, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:23, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: Procedural relisting; the "also nominating" articles were not tagged for AfD. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:24, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep at least K-1 World Grand Prix Selection 2010. Article now has got almost 20 references, following a extensive research of myself in local media, sources including high circulation rated national newspapers' web pages, and websites of eminent national online level newspapers, informative event, sports news, news agencies, tourism and 3 prominent martial arts magazine of the country. Since it's been enriched with independent, reliable and varied 3rd party sources, this article reaches the WP:SPORTSEVENT with no question.
keep, and thank you for referencing this article, Umi1903. Despite the fact that I can't understand Turkish at all, I can see that the event fulfills WP:GNG. The Steve 05:57, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The references added to the article fail to demonstrate notability. Let's just go through them, or their Google translations:
- Ref #1 is a WP:ROUTINE results report.
- Ref #2 is primary and a simple announcement.
- Ref#3 is a WP:ROUTINE event annoucement.
- Ref#4 is a WP:ROUTINE announcement in someone's blog.
- Ref#5 is a bit lengthier intro to the event. It does not appear to be WP:RS, but if it could be shown to be RS, it would be a help here.
- Ref#6 seems to be a dead link.
- Ref#7. Not sure what this is, some sort of pre-event announcement. Short on content, long on pictures.
- Ref#8. At last, a WP:RS source! But article is totally WP:ROUTINE and looks like it's a straight reprint from a wire service or PR service.
- Ref#9. Brief mention on a site that seems to reprint wire and PR service items, presumably for revenue from the rather intrusive ads.
- Ref#10. Two-sentence blurb from indeterminate site.
- Ref#11. Primary and distinctly non-independent source. This is a the very-excited description from a Ticketmaster subsidiary.
- Ref#12. Another mirror of the press release. I think it's a straight copy of ref #2 or #3, but they are starting to blur together, I'm afraid.
- Ref#13. Three-sentence blurb, but at least the picture is different, although a little unnerving.
- Ref#14. Seems to be about some related controversy, rather than the event itself.
- Ref#15. A bit more than routine coverage from what appears to be a "power wrestling fanzine". Helps the notability argument a tiny bit.
- Ref#16. "Savulun! Celebrities were kickboksçı". And that's it.
- Ref#17&18. The mediocre TV ratings provided are consistent with an event that is not notable.
- Ref#19. Simple results listing on a fan site.

If every ordinary sports event that met this low level of notability could be included in WP, then we'd have a listing for every single American football NFL game, every college game for probably the top 50 schools, every major league baseball game, every English Premiership football match and second-division match and third-division match, and on and on. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 11:00, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Hobbes Goodyear. LibStar (talk) 01:46, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see that I've got right to reply your comments. I'm having a tough week in real life and I will make a further explanation. And I'll post it asap. For the start, I should say that the sources are underestimated. Please wait until reply. Many thanks. Umi1903 (talk) 23:32, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all - Hobbes Goodyear' analysis demonstrates no acceptable sources support notability. Neutrality^talk 19:53, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all None of these events seem notable based on WP:EVENT. These articles also lack significant coverage, with the possible exception of Umi1903's efforts on behalf of the Grand Prix Selection event. The problem is that even that event doesn't meet WP:SPORTSEVENT. Papaursa (talk) 17:09, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mate, there's a genuine misunderstanding going on regarding martial arts events and organizations on pro level, by nominator(s) and deletion supporters. These events are NOT simply sports events, they are "sportaintment" events, like WWE, TNA, TNT motorsports, DEW Tour and many others. Wikipedia has got tones of pertinent articles and they are kept in general. My apologies, I'll make a further explanation at earliest conveninence. Umi1903 (talk) 23:32, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I take your point here, although I'm dubious that I would find it ultimately convincing in this case. Would be happy for closing admins to allow you more time to flesh out this argument, or to demonstrate that analysis above gave too short shrift to the references. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 01:20, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all None of these events pass WP:EVENT or WP:SPORTSEVENT. Umi1903, all sports are entertainment. Are you suggesting that every WWE, etc. event is notable? When those events come to town I often don't even find coverage in the local paper (except for ads). Astudent0 (talk) 17:22, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all. Another useless AfD discussion that is far less worthwhile than catalogging information that is relevant to some segment of our readership. In any "event" these pass WP:EVENT. --143.105.13.115 (talk) 19:06, 31 October 2011 (UTC) — 143.105.13.115 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Delete all per WP:NSPORT and WP:PERSISTENCE. Hurricanefan25 | talk 23:49, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all. If these fights had Andy Hug, Francisco Filho, Mirko Crocop, Lyoto Machida, Buakaw Por. Pramuk or maybe Jean Claude Van Damme or Dolph Lundgren in them, then these would be notable. Unfortunately, it would take some Voodoo to bring back a legendary fighter alive or lots of cash to bring the really great and popular ones into these events. PolicarpioM (talk) 10:01, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all as events concerning a notable promotion. No reason why at worst they would not be redirected to K-1, but certainly no pressing need to protest the public from this infromation. --131.123.123.124 (talk) 14:05, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.