Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strikeforce Challengers: Gurgel vs. Evangelista

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 all. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:26, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Strikeforce Challengers: Gurgel vs. Evangelista

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

also nominating:

another sprawling series of useless fighting results that don't meet WP:EVENT. some of these events for a mere few thousand attendees. third party coverage besides sherdog is needed. LibStar (talk) 05:41, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. — — alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 05:46, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep All The majority of these articles contain numerous third-party references to provide verifiability. I see no issues with their notability given that even the most basic Google search turns up numerous results. General consensus has always been to keep event articles by major mixed martial arts promotions such as this. The number of attendees is not relevant to their notability since these events were broadcast either on Showtime or network television. The event Strikeforce: Fedor vs. Rogers, for example, which aired on CBS, drew over 5 million viewers at its peak. The noms characterization of these articles as "useless fighting results" is not consistent with the page views these articles receive, or the careful attention they have garnered from editors and members of the MMA WikiProject. This nomination appears to be the result of a misunderstanding of what constitutes independent third-party coverage (despite previous attempts at constructive discussion with the editor to find common ground) and a personal standard for notability that exceeds general consensus for these types of events (well documented mixed martial arts events held by top-tier promotions). Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 20:29, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep All - Strikeforce is a prominent mixed martial arts organization, easily the UFC's biggest rival until it was acquired by Zuffa. Articles for its events easily meet WP:NOTE and WP:EVENT, lasting effects being that the results of these fights determine champions and rankings of contenders. --NINTENDUDE ⁶⁴ 01:56, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep All - Per argument posited by user Nintendude64 above. Northamerica1000 (talk) 11:19, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep All Appears to pass WP:GNG IMO. --TreyGeek (talk) 14:25, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all If you find an article that doesn't have reliable sources in it already, then just search for the names of those participating plus Strikeforce. Example: "Strikeforce" "Gurgel" "Evangelista" shows some results to look through. [1] Always follow WP:BEFORE and don't just nominate something because you don't like it. Dream Focus 04:41, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well said. I would also add that obscure does not mean not notable and lack of familiarity with the subject should foster doubt, not a rush towards deletion. This is good advice for any AfD nominator. Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 16:09, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Strikeforce Challengers: Gurgel vs. Evangelista and Strikeforce Challengers: Woodley vs. Bears which are current unsourced. Keep the rest. Stuartyeates (talk) 04:06, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Unsourced doesn't mean it should be deleted. It means it needs to be sourced. Sourcing doesn't change the fact that all of these are notable. --NINTENDUDE ⁶⁴ 16:07, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Strikeforce Challengers: Gurgel vs. Evangelista should be easily to find sources for. [2] Strikeforce Challengers: Woodley vs. Bears doesn't have an AFD notice on that article. Finding sources shouldn't be hard though since all these fights get coverage somewhere. [3] Dream Focus 17:33, 26 September 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.