Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Superfight
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 The references provided apprear to be incidental. For this to survive we really need to see some proper sourcing for verifiability if nothing else. Otherwise, this looks like POV original research. Spartaz Humbug! 06:51, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Superfight
Unreferenced boxing term. Was a proposed deletion, but has already been once deleted per Prod in the past and then recreated (which counts as contesting). Unless some good sources about such a concept can be found, it remains little more than a dictionary definition with an ill-defined list. Tikiwont (talk) 10:02, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- Okay, and why are you nominating? 86.44.28.245 (talk) 10:25, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- Well it was indeed half procedural, half because of lacking sources. I've expanded the rationale.--Tikiwont (talk) 10:52, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for that. 86.44.28.245 (talk) 11:14, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- Well it was indeed half procedural, half because of lacking sources. I've expanded the rationale.--Tikiwont (talk) 10:52, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- Weak keep Runs risk of an attempted dict definition of a media hype coinage with an extremely loose application, but if properly sourced, could be a useful list and history of fights deemed superfights by writers not parroting press releases. 86.44.28.245 (talk) 11:14, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
-
- I added some notes and refs to the article to try to indicate what i mean here. 86.44.28.245 (talk) 04:21, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
- Strong Delete: Totally unreferenced and the subject is not even defined properly. It appears to be an entirely subjective definition based on what is deemed "mega". I tagged it as unencyclopedic and unreferenced a while back and nobody has done anything to address these issues. I can't see any hope of getting a half-decent article out of this. --DanielRigal (talk) 11:52, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 13:50, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- Comment - hard to tell really. It gets alot of ghits but which are 'Super fight' and which are a specific term 'superfight' and which are just advertorial bad grammar I don't know. It is crying for one solid reliable source really. I would guess it should be deleted otherwise...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:59, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- 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.
