Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UFC Fight Night: Stevenson vs Guillard

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. Courcelles 10:26, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

UFC Fight Night: Stevenson vs Guillard

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

declined prod. no evidence of meeting WP:GNG. nothing in gnews and google mainly reveals event listings. LibStar (talk) 07:13, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. — Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 15:40, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Received coverage under its other name "UFC Fight Night 9" as explained in the article. --TreyGeek (talk) 16:24, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

how about coverage in non fighting sources? LibStar (talk) 01:45, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot my line of reasoning the last time you asked that question? If so, look here. (And the admins kept that article.) --TreyGeek (talk) 01:59, 1 August 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, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:06, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Passes WP:GNG and WP:MMANOT as multiple independent sources are available to support the notability of this event. I have tried to discuss with the nominator what I believe is a misunderstanding of policy as part of similar AfD debates, but could not get a constructive discussion going to illustrate that martial arts journalism can be "independent of the subject" when the subject is an event (since an event is not the same as an entire sport). I believe the keep consensus for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UFC Fight Night: Shields vs. Ellenberger provides a good guide for interpreting this nomination because of the similarities between the events and comparable amount of third-party coverage. Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 14:23, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep covers the same ground as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UFC Fight Night: Shields vs. Ellenberger --Nate ^t/_c 16:08, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I think there is a lot of confusion on whether or not a martial arts event is notable. To begin with, WP:MMANOT states that individual events are not notable. Even though I would delete this one, I disagree that there should be a blanket ban every event. I would propose the following guidelines: Events that meet WP:GNG are notable. (This would require coverage outside of martial arts sources) Events are notable if a title is at stake. Finally, if a group of events are qualifiers for a notable event, such as in a tournament, they are notable as a group. Otherwise, the just aren't notable. Lets be honest, UFC 9 was entertaining, but it doesn't matter. No titles changed hands, no one died, the matches are not the defining moment of any of these fighters lives. We need to have a community wide discussion where we discuss exactly what notability should be for Martial Arts (that doesn't consist of a slugging match between people who think that every match is noteworthy and people who think that no event is "encyclopedic") , but until we do I'm gonna say delete on this one--Djohns21 (talk) 22:09, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MMANOT suggests that individual events are not automatically notable. This is intended to prevent arguments consisting of UFC XXX or Pride XXX is notable because it is a UFC or Pride event. Events will be notable if they pass WP:N and WP:GNG. --TreyGeek (talk) 01:24, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As someone who was actively involved in the drafting of and discussions concerning WP:MMANOT, I can say that TreyGeek has it right. Anything that passes WP:GNG and is adequately sourced can be on Wikipedia, so the discussion was really about things that didn't obviously pass WP:GNG. The point is that an event only be notable if something happens that makes the event something besides another routine fight night, regardless of who's promoting it. The desire to establish MMA notability guidelines was triggered by AfD discussions, primarily those concerning the notability of fighters. The Wikipedia MMA community did reach a consensus on notability and it's WP:MMANOT. That doesn't mean things can't be changed, just that it should only be done by consensus and after discussion. As far as martial arts goes, that project also has a set of notability criteria at WP:MANOTE. Papaursa (talk) 00:29, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I'd say the article lacks sufficient reliable independent sources and, more importantly, appears to just be routine sports reporting. Papaursa (talk) 17:02, 7 August 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.