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 via consensus below which indicates a failure to meet both WP:EVENT and by similar reasoning WP:SPORTSEVENT as well as WP:ROUTINE. Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 19:40, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

KSW XVII (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)

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

This is a non-notable MMA event promoted by a second tier organization. The article consists of WP:ROUTINE sports results and the event fails WP:EVENT and WP:SPORTSEVENT.

I am also nominating the following related page for the same reasons.

KSW XVIII

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Papaursa (talk) 02:24, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Both as per my ((prod2)), there is no attempt to demonstrate any lasting significance, both are newsworth events, yes, just not encyclopaedic ones, they fail WP:EVENT. Mtking ^(edits) 02:35, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Up-and-coming MMA promotions are very notable with the current state of MMA and the UFC today and also, excellent article. LogicalCreator (talk) 04:07, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete both The promotion's notability is not the issue. These events fail all the notability criteria previously mentioned (WP:EVENT,WP:SPORTSEVENT) and the article is nothing but the results, so it fails WP:ROUTINE. Mdtemp (talk) 15:34, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge into Omnibus However, as there is an ongoing WP discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mixed_martial_arts/MMA_notability on MMA notability issues, it would absolutely not be prudent to delete this or any categorically related article until that discussion is resolved. Beansy (talk) 12:19, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep due to participation of notable fighters and historic significance for Polish MMA. --24.112.202.78 (talk) 15:35, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's no indication anywhere that this event had "historic significance for Polish MMA." Astudent0 (talk) 18:00, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lol what?! The light heavyweight championship was one of the fights and in one the main fights a man considered the greatest strong man of all time competed. An event associated with a legend of sports and an event in which a championship was decided is not "routine". Ha! --24.112.202.78 (talk) 19:38, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete; seems to fall far short of the GNG. bobrayner (talk) 11:32, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Even though it actually passes WP:GNG due to coverage in multiple international reliable sources and the participation of notable fighters? --24.112.202.78 (talk) 14:46, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As has been pointed out many times before, every NFL game has multiple reliable sources, but that's not sufficient to make them all notable. Multiple sources does not guarantee notability. Astudent0 (talk) 18:00, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If the fighters are notable, they could have their own articles. That doesn't make this event notable, because notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. bobrayner (talk) 11:48, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The event has stand alone notability due to coverage in multiple reliable sources. The fact that notable fighters participated in it adds to its notability. --24.112.202.78 (talk) 14:10, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Per our guidelines multiple reliable sources does indeed guarantee notability. The NFL has many events every year. KSW has had XVII events total. They are not comparable. NFL and KSW are apples and oranges. KSW events are more sporadic and therefore less routine than NFL events. --24.112.202.78 (talk) 14:10, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another clearly false statement since all NFL games have multiple reliable sources and yet most are not considered notable. Astudent0 (talk) 17:43, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So then by your own admission, if anything we should also cover all NFL games. --24.112.202.78 (talk) 19:04, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete both Fails WP:EVENT and WP:ROUTINE. In addition, coverage is from the organization and sherdog only (although additional sources, as previously mentioned, still wouldn't make these events notable). Astudent0 (talk) 18:00, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually, it passes WP:EVENT due to the non-routine coverage of the event in Polish and English language sources alike. It is blatantly dishonest to claim it is only covered by the organization and Sherdog. --24.112.202.78 (talk) 14:10, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it is blatantly true that those are the only two sources. You have also failed to give any sources to show "non-routine coverage" or that these events are historically significant (as required by WP:EVENT). Astudent0 (talk) 17:43, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is a thing called Google and a thing called the Polish language. If you both to do actual research beyond just looking at the article, you will see that the event is covered in non-routine manner in other sources, including not just in English. You have failed to present any reason for deletion per WP:BEFORE. It is insulting and plain lazy to ask me or anyone else to do what you should be able to do on your own. --24.112.202.78 (talk) 19:04, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete both - The only independent coverage appears to be either WP:ROUTINE. The WP:BURDEN is on the keepers to demonstrate that non-routine, independent coverage exists, and that has not been met. If it is, would be glad to reconsider. Rlendog (talk) 14:58, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Check the polish articles from non-MMA specific sites. The strongman is internationally known due to his many accomplishments. So, this event, which also featured a title fight, is covered extensively in European sources in the context of how it has affected the legacy of arguably the greatest strongman in modern times. The results of the event are alluded to in coverage of future events, i.e. showing their continued relevance to the notable fighters' history. Another way that the coverage is non-routine is due to the most important fight's results being changed after the event aired: [1]. There are numerous articles about how it was changed to a no contest and this controversy persisted in post-event coverage of the fight for some time afterwards, meaning that its coverage went beyond routine next day post-fight results to include article length discussions of the controversial changes several days after the event aired and in many different articles in Polish and English alike. So, we have an event with a title fight, in which notable fighters participated, from Poland's largest MMA promotion, and due to a controversial decision change, coverage of the event that continued across multiple websites for days after the event discussing the controversial change, why it happened, its significance, etc. beyond just listing results. Something with a championship fight from a major international promotion with notable fighters, and coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources in at least two languages absolutely meets our inclusion criteria. Thank you for reconsidering! --24.112.202.78 (talk) 18:14, 3 May 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.