Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inoki Bom-Ba-Ye 2001

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 all. The "keep" !voters have failed to address the concerns that this sporting event has had only WP:ROUTINE coverage. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:44, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Inoki Bom-Ba-Ye 2001

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

no evidence of meeting WP:SPORTSEVENT. routine fighting event. having notable participants does not mean it's automatically notable. also nominating:

Inoki Bom-Ba-Ye 2002 LibStar (talk) 01:13, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:33, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 14:41, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Events were supercards, as reflected by the notability of the participants, which were nationally-televised annual shows. In other words, absolutely not routine events. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 14:50, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

how are they super cards? What titles are being won? LibStar (talk) 15:13, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to our article, a supercard features "multiple high-level matches and/or special attractions". These shows featured fights between notable competitors with the addition of special attractions such as matches featuring politician and legendary pro-wrestler Antonio Inoki and a legit fight between Yuji Nagata and Mirko Cro Cop Filipovic (the two top stars of puroresu and MMA at that time). ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 17:08, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep due to non-routine nature of event. --WR Reader (talk) 16:17, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Many things aren't routine. Where is the notability and significant independent coverage? Papaursa (talk) 17:10, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In Japanese, presumably. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 17:16, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't presume, please show me the coverage. Papaursa (talk) 17:28, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Media outlets are referenced on the Japanese Wikipedia version. Enjoy. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 17:33, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As best I can tell, most of these articles are about contract disagreements and who will be fighting who. One article is about a fight at the event, but among the spectators not in the ring. I didn't see anything to show this event was notable. The fact that there were some notable fighters does not make the event notable (WP:NOTINHERITED). Otherwise every football game could be considered notable. Papaursa (talk) 17:51, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One cannot logically compare a football match to a professional fighting show. Footballers play weekly, fighters don't. Inoki Bom-Ba-Ye is an annual event not a weekly television show. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 19:39, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both The only source for either article is a list of the results. The articles lack significant coverage and fail WP:SPORTSEVENT. Papaursa (talk) 17:10, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep both by default, i.e. no real reason or need exists for deletion. Sources exist discussing this event in which champion caliber fighters participated, i.e. it is notable and verifiable by any reasonable standard. Deleting these articles, which are a record of sports history that provides valuable encyclopedic information for readers, while instead having a discussion about deleting the articles that really provides no useful record of anything, just does not make sense. By the way, any predictions for tonight's PPV? --The Bachmann Editor Overdrive (talk) 18:37, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ITSUSEFUL is not a reason for keeping. WP is not a repository of sporting results. The reason for deletion is failure of WP:SPORTSEVENT. LibStar (talk) 02:18, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Both articles fail WP:ROUTINE. Internet searches provide only the usual fight cards and results. There is very little coverage of either event therefore they both fail WP:GNG. --TreyGeek (talk) 22:37, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Deltete both Articles fail WP:ROUTINE and WP:SPORTSEVENT. There's no indication of notability, only routine sports coverage. Mdtemp (talk) 15:12, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep both. Articles clearly pass WP:ROUTINE and WP:SPORTSEVENT due to non-routine and exceptional nature of these events (annual events are not routine like weekly seasonal events), which are not really comparable to any random baseball game, for example. The participation of mainstream fighters and the fact that they are covered in association with these event in not just English, but also foreign language sources further demonstrates that these article meet WP:GNG. Finally, "it's useful" is actually a very good reason for keeping these or any articles, as after all, one of the main points for an encyclopedia to exist in the first place is because it is a useful reference tool. Objectively speaking, there is no reason to delete these articles. Just not liking something that is relevant to other readers is not a reason to delete anything. There is no benefit to anyone by getting rid of these, whereas by keeping them, at least those interested in the subject can have a handy reference to this aspect of mixed-martial arts history. Even in a worst case scenario, these would be redirected, but there is no one we need to protect from this information that would justify deleting it altogether. --Temporary for Bonaparte (talk) 16:15, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge the 2001, 2002, & 2003 articles into a single Inoki Bom-Ba-Ye article. The series of events is notable in the early history of mixed martial arts contests. If these events were held today, they probably wouldn't be notable because of the relative popularity of the sport. But, at a time when there weren't nearly as many opportunities for these athletes to compete, these events were notable (and notability isn't temporary). The series of events would seem to be more notable than any one individual event, therefore, a merge seems appropriate. Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 19:57, 17 January 2012 (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.