Talk:Mixed martial arts/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Proposed change of "clinch and pound"

Clinch and pound is such an ugly name and you never hear anyone call it that at all. I think it would be better called simply the clinch or clinch/dirty boxing. I just think it could be named more appropriately Thesaddestday 10:56, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Well I changed the title from clinch and pound to dirty boxing, which it is much more often referred to as... I also adjusted the text slightly. Nobody commented on my proposal so I went ahead and did it, if anyone has any different thoughts or anything lemme know here Thesaddestday 05:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Dirty boxing is only a part of the MMA clinch fighting. "Clinch fighting", I think, is a better title.
-CasualFighter 23:02, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

POV in "Lay and pray"

The editor that was deleting the "lay and pray" section wrote on my talk page that "it was an attack on a few fighters." Looking over it, I agree that the section is a bit POVish and even admits LnP is a derogatory term. I've removed some POV language and the example fighters, who I feel should only be listed if there is a valid source. I would like to hear others' thoughts, though. -SpuriousQ (talk) 20:32, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Agree, all the example fighters should be removed unless a source gives them as an example. This goes for all the section, but it is particularly important for this section since it is negative information. VegaDark 21:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
I agree the it was not the best writing, don't know enough about various tactics to correct reliably though, removing the section totally was not the answer however. On the point of to many examples would limiting it to 3 per style & on fighter in more than one unless there style has changed be appropriate (3 is out of the air but seem about right) --Nate1481 22:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Thunderlippps did a great job fixing up the lay n pray section, I'm pretty happy with it now. Having the example fighters in the other sections without a source is questionable (WP:OR, WP:V), but I don't particularly mind them. If someone wants to remove them, though, I wouldn't object. -SpuriousQ (talk) 23:08, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Why was the reference removed from Lay and Pray? The reference article had a definition of "lay and pray". Oh well, I put it back. It would be nice, however, to hear a reason for removing it in the first place. Tparameter 00:03, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

The Lay'n Pray section has a sneak promotion of Chris Leben. Part1 of this is by examplifying Josh Koscheck as a Lay'n Pray fighter (as he neutralized Chris Leben from top position which a Leben-fan would characterize as a Lay'n Pray during elimination bout of the first season of "The ultimate fighter"). Part 2 is a non-informative reference to an article promoting Chris Leben. Leben is by no means a significant fighter in the sport. In addition, the lay'n pray section is also not just "pray for decision", but also "pray for not being stood up" and "pray that an opening will emerge all by itself". Characterized by:

  • Landing ineffective strikes due to unwillingness of compromising position for shifting body weight necessary for power.
  • May shift position (stack up, crawl in) but making no positional advances.

Habalabam

WP:SOFIXIT :-) I've removed the mention of Koscheck as we agreed above to not list any example fighters without a reliable source. However, I think the Seattle article should stay because it is a reliable source that includes a definition of "lay and pray". -SpuriousQ (talk) 08:04, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I've always believed that it was lay and PREY rather than pray. the prey meaning that the control the fighter on the ground. that is also much less offensive than "praying for the round to end". it is also referred to commonly on MMA sites as lay and prey anyhow http://ufcjunkie.com/2007/04/08/a-night-of-upsets-serra-terrorizes-ufc-69/ refers to Koscheks as "lay and prey" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.105.204.63 (talk) 08:47, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

The article you linked to doesn't contain any mention of "lay and [pray/prey]." Two people mention it in the comments, one saying "pray" and the other saying "prey." Prey is just a mispelling; see the article cited in the article, [1], and [2] for confirmation. MrVibrating (talk) 12:50, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Other References

How do we add other references? I click to edit it and there isnt a list there. I think this article needs at least a few books as references. --Clausewitz01 03:11, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Clausewitz01, the numbered list you see is actually generated by in-line tags in the article text itself (the <ref> tags). These are footnotes to support specific statements in the article. If you want to add footnotes, see WP:FOOT. If you instead want to add some books as suggested further reading, you should create a new section called "Further reading" and add them there. See WP:CITE for even more information about this. Alternatively, you could just put the books on this talk page and I'd be willing to help you add them to the article (provided of course, they are relevant and reliable sources. Hope this helps :-) -SpuriousQ (talk) 03:18, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks SpuriousQ, I was thinking of adding;

Gentry, Clyde (2005-04-01). No Holds Barred: Ultimate Fighting and the Martial Arts Revolution. Milo Books. ISBN 978-1903854303. 

Thanks again SpuriousQ, I have added our final version under "Main References" --Clausewitz01 23:00, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Martial art?

I don't see the usefulness of arguing that mixed martial arts is not a martial art. Some fighters in the younger generation are referred to as "mixed martial arts fighters" rather than wrestlers or boxers etc. because their training can't be reduced to a single or small number of disciplines. What's the problem with using the martial art infobox?--Ty580 20:39, 6 March 2007 (UTC) Also, "hybrid martial arts" doesn't seem to be a commonly used term, yielding .5% of the google hits that "mixed martial arts" yields (500 vs. 1.4 million).--Ty580 20:43, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

See Talk:Mixed martial arts/Archive 1#Hybrid martial arts. MMA is unquestionably a sport, but there is no consensus that it is a fighting style in of itself. The discussion on martial arts styles created from other martial arts split off to a different article long ago, and for organizational reasons and to make things clear to the average reader, they should be kept separate. hateless 20:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
What do we have to remove from the infobox in order to make it acceptable to you?--Ty580 22:24, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
The infobox is completely inappropriate. It should not be there at all. hateless 23:39, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

It would be a surprise to MMA fighters such as Rich Franklin that they don't do martial arts. The fighting style associated with MMA events such as Pride and the UFC is commonly described to consist of, for example, stand-up fighting, clinch fighting, and groundfighting. If MMA fighting doesn't constitute a style of fighting, than it wouldn't be possible to make generalizations about it's common features. I think it would be counter productive to categorize MMA fighting under "sports," to the exclusion of "martial arts," as it does belong to both categories. --Ty580 00:00, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Of course MMA is not irrelevant to martial arts, stop using strawmen. Is it a style however? Do you get black belts in MMA? Does it consider what is proper technique, as in say, a proper way of stand-up fighting? To all the above, no. In the first paragraph of Martial arts, it states that a martial art is codified. MMA fighting is not codified, it only excludes techniques and has no opinions on the rest. You can do the funky chicken in a cage and that's fine with MMA, but it damn sure isn't a martial art. hateless 00:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Other reference works don't state a martial art must be codified [3] [4] and MMA meets both of these sources' definitions. As well, there is consensus on techniques in the MMA community, such as sprawling to avoid take-downs, going for underhooks in certain clinch fighting situations, or standing up to defend against certain submissions.--Ty580 01:22, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Sprawling to defend against a takedown is a wrestling technique, likewise going for underhooks. Submission defence is a Brazilian jiu-jitsu technique or has been gleaned from various submission wrestling styles. Mixed martial arts is still a sport, whereas hybrid martial arts are combining codified martial arts to create a new, codified martial art. At best, a non-codified martial art should be called a fighting system but MMA is a combat sport, not a martial art or fighting system. -- Crazyknight 14:56, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Is Judo only a sport and not a style because it is just a mix of different moves from jujitsu? Many places teach a style called "Mixed Martial Arts" that was developed by collecting moves that were effective in the sport of Mixed Martial Arts. Also some of these places that teach MMA do so for self-defense reasons. MMA is both a sport and a style just like Judo and Boxing. --Jayson Virissimo 07:12, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
I would say that MMA itself is not a 'codified martial art', but there are hybrid systems of martial arts (for example Miletich Fighting Systems) that are used in MMA. When someone asks what kind of martial art I do, I tell them "mixed martial arts"... and many martial arts schools refer to their hybrid systems as such (MMA). However, there are other naming conventions (Pankration, for instance), so I say these martials arts that call themselves MMA are hybrid martial arts, whereas MMA itself is a sport. Chaos0mega 22:00, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Ty580, why do you continue to fight this fight and keep insisting that MMA is a martial art in of itself? Why are you inserting the MA link template to this page when it doesn't even have a link to this article? Why can't you understand that two concepts that are intricately linked can be completely separate concepts? hateless 00:37, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually it dose link (mixed & hybrid title) but doesn't show up as it's on that page (a normal feature in templates). It's not a martial art but people interested in MMA may well be interested in martial arts in general, so the template is useful. --Nate1481( t/c) 11:14, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
We are having the same discussion in Talk:Kimbo Slice --Mista-X 17:58, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Mixed martial arts is a style and a sport, in the same way as boxing, Muay Thai, Greco-roman, etc. There are lots of people that identify there style as "Mixed martial arts" and many schools that teach "Mixed martial arts" as there style. It is not a rule set, there are many rule sets within it. If I join a boxing gym I am not practicing "Marquis of Queensbury", I am practicing "Boxing", hat would be my style. In MMA you have different rules as well, I do not practice "Unified rules" I practice MMA. 15 years ago MMA was not really a style, but now it is, it is a style that has evolved out of the rules. It has it's own unique techniques, strategies and training methods. Canadian Ninja 16:35, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Mixed martial arts has styles. Emphasis on the plural, emphasis on the s in arts. There is no one MMA style, that's like saying Quinton Jackson and Jeremy Horn fight using the same techniques. A singular MMA style is not likely to emerge for another decade or so. People might practice MMA, go to schools for MMA, and that's fine, they're learning multiple arts at the same time, not one, and the same arts are not being taught in every MMA school. hateless 06:29, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Standard MMA Exercise Routine

I think something that might be pretty interesting for the article would be a few lines on what kind of exercise routine MMA fighters usually carry out. At present it says they engage in strength training, endurance training etc., but it would be interesting if it said more about how much of each they do. I've heard that fighters like Frank Shamrock used to do massive amounts of exercise but then I read in an interview a while back that Rickson Gracie barely did any apart from just practising jiu-jitsu. I guess some fighters vary in how much of each they do, and that's reflected in their fighting style. Also some stuff about what kind of routine beginners should go for would be interesting too. Doom jester 17:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Legality

I just came by a claim on a message board that MMA is banned in France, the gov't won't even let Eurosport air PRIDE. I'm like whoa, does anyone have any info on this? hateless 18:32, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

There's all sort of weird legalities as regards MMA in Europe. While the training of MMA is allowed in France, you have heard correctly that fights are banned. I seem to recall MMA also being banned in Finland and many countries either banning or frowning upon MMA in a cage, most notably Holland, where MMA is accepted by only in a ring.

Crazyknight 00:20, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Wait, so it is banned from even being shown on TV? I could understand not allowing events to take place in the countries, but not allowing it to be on TV seems way too extreme. There should be a section on this page discussing that. VegaDark 00:51, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
I don't think Finland banned MMA fights. There is an organization over there called Finn Fight. They allow headbutts even! Chaos0mega 21:50, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
What's the point of banning it if it's on TV? France has an odd fighting heritage. Look at savate for instance. France has produced some useful fighters at a European level but not even boxing seems that big there. Crazyknight 16:21, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
According to a video interview with Joachim Hansen from June (it was done by MMA weekly) MMA is banned in Norway and Sweden. Lol @ at the rule in holland. MMA is undeniably safer in a cage than a ring. It's amazing how the negative symbol of a cage in people's minds can cloud their judgement —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.92.164.200 (talk) 23:05, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


There should be a section on the main page which details the legality of MMA in various countries as well as places where regulation exists. For example, what states in U.S. have regulated MMA? (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.100.144.80 (talk)

Other orgs

I don't see any mention of other Japanese orgs such as RINGS and Pancrase here. I'd add them, but I'm unsure as to their place in the history of the sport.

Bruce Lee / MMA?

Quite frankly, Bruce Lee had nothing to do with MMA at any time. He should not be mentioned in this article since the sport was not in any way shaped by or dependent on him. Animal Cracker Hippopotamus 09:21, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Clyde Gentry (in No Hold Barred): "Many believe that this sport was what the late Bruce Lee truly envisioned with his notes on martial arts, fighting, cross-training, and physical fitness." Dana White (from here): "Actually, the father of mixed martial arts, if you will, was Bruce Lee." Now, the second quote you can take with a grain of salt, but Gentry is a reliable source that is quoted extensively in this article and in other articles like UFC. It seems there are plenty who believe his ideas are connected to MMA in some way. It probably merits a sentence of mention, albeit nothing more substantial than lei tai, Bartitsu, or pankration. hateless 17:50, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Gentry is not a source showing that Bruce Lee had anything to do with the development of MMA. Many people may very well believe that MMA is what Bruce Lee envisioned. Many others believe entirely different things. It's irrelevant unless there is a historical link between Bruce Lee and the formation of the sport of mixed martial arts. There is not. Similarly, it can be presumed that Dana White was referring to Bruce Lee as the father of MMA in an intellectual sense, and even then only in the U.S. in any meaningful way. Bruce Lee may have been the most well-known advocate of cross-training in the States at that time. I also do not deny that he brought martial arts to a new level of popularity and even inspired entire generations of martial artists, and many of them have even competed in mixed martial arts. It is perfectly fine to mention these contributions in the articles about Bruce Lee, Jeet Kune Do, cross-training, or what have you. But mixed martial arts as a sport in the U.S. can be directly traced to the formation of the UFC which can be directly traced to Vale Tudo and the Gracie Challenge. Bruce Lee had no involvement with any of those things, hence he should not be credited as being part of the history of the creation of the sport of mixed martial arts. Animal Cracker Hippopotamus 05:33, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

That sounds right that Bruce Lee didn't have any direct influence, but the wording in the article seems to still be correct, that the history can be traced to Bruce Lee's work, among other sources. The citations provided by Hateless are examples of sources connecting the history in that manner.--Ty580 13:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
MMA might very well be what Bruce envisioned, but that's not what the quote states.
Moreover, the emergence of Bruce Lee in the late 1960's and early 1970's paved the way for further studies of hybrid fighting
This is right after we talk about modern MMA being the result of two interconnected movements: vale tudo events in Brazil, followed by the Japanese shoot wrestling shows. That clearly leaves the reader with the impression that Lee had as much to do with the modern MMA as the Gracies, if not more.
My suggestion: let's either change this paragraph to say that the concept of MMA sounds like some of Lee's ideas (instead of creating the impression that his ideas 'paved the way' for MMA), or delete this paragraph altogether. -CasualFighter 20:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Sounds fine. I was referring to the wording that was in the introduction at the time, "...the modern sport can be traced to . . . Bruce Lee's studies of hybrid fighting in the late 1960s and early 1970s."--Ty580 22:49, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Great! I'll wait for hateless to chime in. -CasualFighter 04:31, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
I concur too. hateless 17:26, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
This article needs to distinguish between referring to MMA as a tournament format(UFC, Pride, Vale Tudo) or referring to MMA as a fighting concept(eg: Jeet Kune Do). Obviously, UFC or Vale Tudo can't be directly related to Jeet Kune Do because one is a tournament format, while the other is a actual combat concept of mixing different Martial Arts. Bruce didn't have anything directly to do with the creation of the UFC tournament itself, but he did have a large influence in the concept of taking all the different styles and combining them into one, that is why he is called the "Father of MMA" by Dana White. He isn't necessarily the father of MMA format tournaments, but the father of the concept of MMA, and that is what Dana White mean't.--BluevState 23:45, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

<-MMA is best known as a rules set, the place for Jeet kune do etc would be the Hybrid martial arts article --Nate1481( t/c) 09:24, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

MMA is known as both a rules set and a fighting concept, they are both linked. People who train under the MMA fighting concept are going to participate in a MMA-rules tournament, just like a ramp skateboarder is going to participate in a ramp-rules tournament. The tournament is simply the means to test the practitioners of the concept. --BluevState 19:08, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

NHB

NHB should not redirect here as there are no (or few) genuine no-holds-barred organisations still running. There is already a rules section stating the common rule against small-joint manipulation which could be considered a "hold" and even if it isn't "no-holds-barred" is generally taken to mean all strikes are legal, as is not the case with modern MMA competition.

The article does say that modern MMA isn't NHB but unless someone writes an article where else should if point? --Nate 08:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree, unless someone creates an article for NHB as a historical article, then there is no need to change it. MMA & NHB go hand in hand. Jobjobjob 09:21, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

if "no hold barred" is gonna redirect here, shouldn't it at least mention the origin of the phrase? isn't it relevant anyway? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.92.244.167 (talk • contribs)

perhaps if someone wrote an article on the vale tudo fights in brazil? thats were most of the now famous brazilian fighters got their start. in fact there are still vale tudo gyms around such as Ruas Vale Tudo, and arguably the best gym on earth chute boxe vale tudo that train for the NHB type of fight.

Unified Rules

A section detailing the Unified Rules of MMA ought to be included, especially now that PRIDE is going to be following it, which has internationalized it beyond simply being the dominant US ruleset. - Anonymous. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.22.252.216 (talk) 04:11, 24 April 2007 (UTC).

The unified rules are discussed in mixed martial arts rules, it was branched off of this article a little while ago. hateless 18:19, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

History of MMA

I believe Pancrase and Shooto, both of which predate UFC - should be included in the opening statement in regards to emerging of MMA. Jobjobjob 09:24, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Some comment like "while the modern sport ... there is a wider history including" might be good. details aren't needed as there is a history section mentioning it already. --Nate 08:00, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

"Spray and pray" removed

I removed "Spray and pray" from the strategies section, as a google search for "spray and pray" mma yields less than 35 hits.--Ty580 11:55, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Lead image

Does anybody else agree that the lead needs a better image? The current one is blurry, framed very poorly, and used under a fair use rationale. A free alternative would be best, but in my opinion an excellent non-free action shot will do. east.718 03:45, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Here's the uncropped version of the lead image and another screenshot of the submission a second later. These are the only screenshots of the fight that I still have, and seemed to be the best shots of the fight.--Ty580
I believe a lead image of this article should ideally represent both the standing and ground fighting aspects of the sport, which the current image seems to do well. I've changed the lead image to the uncropped version, which might make it better.--Ty580 06:10, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
My concern with cropping was mainly on the top, the lead is now awkward with an overcrop in one direction and an undercrop in the other. I've reverted to the previous image and made the images in your talk comment linked because current fair use criteria does not permit their use here.

while most of this could be true, there is no real proof that what is written here hold truth.... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.178.45.195 (talk) 01:14, August 22, 2007 (UTC)

I completely agree with your suggestion about representing all aspects of the sport. The image is only a minor point of contention compared to the over article anyway, and can hold on for a while. I'll go through some CC-licensed Flickr galleries and Susumu Nagao's gallery to try to find a better image.
My other concern was that of the Liddell-Ortiz image under the "Modern" section—the fair use rationale does not appear to be valid as it does not depict anything textual. The caption is also quite large and there's already two pictures cluttering up that relatively small section, do you mind if I move the caption's sources into the main text and the image elsewhere, provided the text supports it? east.718 06:20, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for linking the non-free images. I wasn't aware of Nagao's gallery, which looks good.
I believe the Liddell-Ortiz match is important to discuss in the history section, and that the image most naturally fits where the match is discussed. The history section doesn't seem too cluttered to me, but if the image works somewhere else that's fine.--Ty580 06:44, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
I looked through a lot of CC-licensed Flickr galleries, and found nothing useful. I did find these photos from Nagao's gallery though, which one do you think is best? [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] Sadly, most photos of UFC events can't be used because Nagao's pictures are taken at ringside and the cage gets in the way. east.718 08:14, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Nice shots. I think the one with Kazuo Misaki and Denis Kang[13] would be very good as the lead image. It was the final match of the Welterweight Grand Prix in PRIDE Bushido 13.--Ty580 12:03, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
I like Misaki vs. Kang too. Something about the current lead image doesn't sit well with me however, it doesn't look like a sporting picture, it could be interpreted as someone beating someone else defenseless. hateless 05:27, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
The Misaki-Kang picture was up, but an admin deleted it on the grounds of replaceable fair use. The current lead picture isn't great, but is the best free one I've found to date. east.718 13:07, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Fighting Styles

I propose that the fighting styles should be compeletely overhauled. Sprawl and Brawl, Ground and Pound, Dirty Boxing, are merely generalized descriptions of different phases of a fighter's game. I think this page would be much better served by highlighted the various disciplines that have proven effective in MMA, like we do in the phases of fighting section. If you asked Mirko Cro Cop what kind of fight he was he wouldn't say "I'm a sprawl and brawler." In addition, the best fighters in the world will never fit into a category. What kind of fighter is Fedor? What kind of fighter is Randy Couture? Couture is clearly a wrestler, but somehow he is categorized by a very small aspect of any fight known as dirty boxing. TheHammer24 22:16, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, I think categorizing individual fighters into narrow slots is OR or just being too subjective for WP. hateless 22:34, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
I am removing the list of example of fighters. Again, you cannot fit fighters into such narrow categories. It is debatable and too POV to try and do otherwise. Fedor's discipline is Sambo, he fights stand up, GNP, and submission depending on the opponent. Furthermore, to classify Wanderlei Silva and Randy Couture in the same group is ludicrous and misleading to those not familiar to the sport.TheHammer24 04:16, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree. These are slang terms and don't belong in an encyclopedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.0.66.253 (talk) 07:48:08, August 19, 2007 (UTC)

Good article

Is there any reason this hasn't been put in yet? 3 cite tags on e on shooto's date, should be easy enough, the 2 in pre-history are the tricky ones one quote cite & now fair use images have been largely replaced nearly there --Nate1481( t/c) 14:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

There too many ref needed tags, several sections are still devoid of references. hateless 23:37, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

It is certain that the Gracie family uses BJJ as go many of the MMA competitors, however, the Gracie's did not invent Jujitsu, which many of the holds and submissions come from, theirs is but one application of jujitsu. I don't believe all the competitors use their style...some are from traditional Japanese Jujitsu...so that may want to be reworded. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.168.121.2 (talk) 08:58, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Minor Change

I've noticed this a lot with numerous articles and it's becoming annoying. Anyway, I removed this:

http://www.ocfightcenter.com - BEST MMA TRAINING in ORANGE COUNTY, CA

MastaFighta 17:56, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

POV tag

On the evolution section, why? Un/poorly-sourced yes, Original Resarch because of this; possibly but POV?Huh? --Nate1481( t/c) 08:57, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. east.718 at 12:48, August 15, 2007
It's obviously written from the POV of BJJ/MMA enthusiasts. It's not the content itself that's bad but the type of wording that makes it sound very one sided. --Mista-X 22:48, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Can you give an example? Articles written by fans is the norm not the exception, I can see how it's a little one sided but why didn't you just change it rather than slapping a POV tag on? --Nate1481( t/c) 09:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Rephrased one bit that was little emphatic. Made some coy edit changes @ the same time --Nate1481( t/c) 09:30, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

UFC 4 Picture

Naming is funny, the image file says Royce Gracie vs Dan Severn, but it's not Severn in the picture, it's Jason Delucia. So the caption saying Delucia is not a mistake, it's the file name that was. --Canadian Ninja 15:07, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Martial art infobox, again

There is no consensus on whether MMA is an actual martial art, see above. That said, I'm willing to tolerate the use of the MA infobox there as long as certain fields are kept blank: country of origin and parenthood, and the reason for such is because as we said above, MMA is not a codified martial art and is at best a loose group of techniques that have been so far successful in fighting under a certain ruleset. Parenthood styles can include every MA in the world right now, and there's nothing stopping from listing every one in that box. Same for country of origin. Listing anything under both also has WP:OR issues. hateless 06:30, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

It's a fair call, it developed semi-independently in various places form various styles including pro-wrestling... The box is useful be leave those blank--Nate1481( t/c) 10:59, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
I believe this page has some useful information. east.718 at 14:26, 10/9/2007
It was interesting right up to the point is suggests all martial arts are derived from pankration. That's like arguing what colour dinosaurs were, there is all sorts of supporting evidence for various theories but you can't definitively say any of them. Did Alexander's arrival affect MA development in Asia, almost certainly did it wipe out what was, in all likely hood, there before & replace it? NO. /rant Interesting but way to POV to be used as a source.--Nate1481( t/c) 15:20, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Only thing I want to say about the infobox is let's not let it get carried away with it's list of famous practitioners, we don't need every fighter that's ever been at the top of the food chain listed. Maybe just a handful of fighters that really made a difference and influenced the sport in a big way Canadian Ninja 04:40, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. I've narrowed the list to 3-4 lines, which is about where I estimate is enough before it gets incomprehensible. Some names should be on or some taken off, but this seems to be a good-sized list. hateless 06:13, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
I removed everything before noticing this discussion (I work backwards to forwards on my watchlist, and the October 10/October 11 divide messed me up). I still stand by my point that we should find sources to establish who's a "notable practicioner." east.718 at 06:38, 10/11/2007
Fair enough, UFC hall of Fame seems a good start, Royce Gracie, Ken Shamrock, Dan Severn & Randy Couture. That covers UFC fighters, Probably want a couple non-UFC guys to be there as well to keep bias out, not sure how to establish that apart from there records though. Fedor seems a top candidate, Vanderlei maybe, Rickson Gracie as well, but he'd be really hard to source. Canadian Ninja 14:04, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

'Corrections' to endings

I restored the original text again because it matched the cited sources. For example, one of the deleted sentences says "a warning will be given when a fighter commits a foul or illegal action or does not follow the referee's instruction. Three warnings will result in a disqualification."

1. The cited rules at [14] state: A "warning" will be given in the form of a yellow card when a fighter commits an illegal action or does not follow the referee's instruction. Three warnings will result in a disqualification.

2. The cited rules at [15] state: Disqualification occurs after any combination of three or the fouls listed in (a) above or after a referee determines that a foul was intentional and flagrant.

To put anything other than that in the article would require proper cited sources. Thanks. --David Broadfoot (talk) 05:13, 16 December 2007 (UTC)


Also, the edit that I objected to had deleted "Cage Fighting" as an "aka", and it introduced "Freestyle fighting" as an "aka". 1. "Cage fighting" is a clear "aka" for MMA, and in fact Wikipedia redirects that term to this MMA page. 2. Read Freestyle fighting to see why that is not synonymous with MMA. I just added 'Freestyle fighting' to the "See also" section. --David Broadfoot (talk) 05:22, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

These are the correct versions of victories. Also, since different organizations used different rules, and PRIDE FC is gone, I think these need to be changed. Also, I removed the other names known as well. These are wrong as well since not all mixed martial arts is in a cage and not all mixed martial arts is through the UFC. Vale Tudo and No Holds bared are iffy too since they're versions of mixed martial arts. I understand how freestyle cannot be synonymous with mixed martial arts but it is still much closer to what the topic is than the others and it could be argued that we change MMA to freestyle.Combat52 2:34, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
You may be 100% correct, but that is not the way Wikipedia works. The newly defined endings do not match the references quoted, so the changes are both unsourced and represent WP:OR. You can change it back again as soon as you can provide supporting notable references. Thanks. --David Broadfoot (talk) 13:28, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

create