Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UFC 79

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 no consensus, defaulting to keep (non-admin closure). Both sides of this deletion debate have some legitimate arguments, and it is clear to me that there is no consensus to delete or keep the article. Pablo Talk | Contributions 09:26, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] UFC 79

UFC 79 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Crystal clear case of crystalballing (sorry). No information is available on the event except for a tentative date provided by DirecTV's advertising department. east.718 at 02:38, October 4, 2007

  • Not sure I really agree. We're not talking a long time away here, just a few months. The crystalballing article says:
"Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place."
  • I'd say this qualifies for that at least. If this was an AFD for, say, UFC 153, that would be a different story. Tuckdogg 02:49, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Articles are inappropriate when "nothing can be said about them that is verifiable and not original research" (straight from WP:NOT). There isn't even a confirmed venue or match, or even a date from the promoter. east.718 at 03:03, October 4, 2007
  • Keep- it's so soon, I can't call it CB'ingJJJ999 02:56, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - according to crystalballing: 'Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place.' - I think this event is notable (though not to my taste) and certain to take place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hardnfast (talk • contribs) 04:00, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - crystalballing and the above quote from WP:NOT... there is NO information about the event except a tentative date Thesaddestday 05:13, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - No info & not RS for the date yet. (esp as not on UFC.com)--Nate1481( t/c) 09:00, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - Why would DirecTV include a date on their advertising if it wasn't set?--Marcbjr2 14:04, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Mere weeks away, and if the previous 78 are any indication, all but certain to occur. We'll have barely started to grow grass on top by the time people start digging again. (I remember some attempts to AFD singles the day before release under WP:CRYSTAL.) I suppose my rationale rests mainly on the AFD being a waste of time since recreation is going to happen very soon. It's quite different with articles like the 2015 Greenland Cup or whatnot. --Dhartung | Talk 10:02, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Until its announced by the UFC it can be debated. But i'd go for know, is starting to build an article what will be created. The rumours (one linked bellow) only qualify for wiki news though. --Nate1481( t/c) 09:34, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Certain to happen, and if you think there's no info, you haven't looked. For example: [1] [2] [3][4] [5] - Indecision 07:01, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Would you care to add the details & sources? Thoes when added would be enough for me. --Nate1481( t/c) 09:30, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Those are all rumor blogs... besides, Silva-Liddell's been derailed again and Tanner is back in retirement. east.718 at 19:03, 10/8/2007
  • I added some likely matchups with references. - Indecision 04:32, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
  • No offense, but "likely" still means "speculative" (*cough*crystalballing*cough*), which means those fights don't belong on the UFC 79 page. Only fights that are confirmed should be posted. I still think the page should be kept, but those fights should come down until there's an official announcement. The Clementi-Guillard fight can maybe stay (Clementi did say in the listed source that Joe Silva has "officially" confirmed to him that the fight is on), but the rest of the sources all say they're just "expected" or "likely" fights. Tuckdogg 04:52, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Anything that happens in the future is speculative. How likely does something have to be exactly? Even officially announced fights can change. The Crystalballing section is far from clear on how to handle this (nor is it written in stone), and says "speculation about it must be well documented". The speculation about these fights, especially Hughes vs Serra is well documented. - Indecision 05:15, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
  • If a fighter says the have signed a contract, or the UFC announce it that's official. A fair rule? --Nate1481( t/c) 09:58, 9 October 2007 (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.