Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nemesis Fighting: MMA Global Invasion

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. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nemesis Fighting: MMA Global Invasion

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

the only sources I could not find from gnews [1] is MMA which is not third party. pretty much the same for google. No evidence of significant third party coverage required to meet WP:GNG. Also having notable participants or being televised does not mean keep either. LibStar (talk) 02:30, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. — —Tom Morris (talk) 11:37, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note. This needs to be added to mixed martial arts discussion page as well.Marty Rockatansky (talk) 15:36, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:05, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. — Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 14:12, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Found plenty of coverage at usatoday.com and virtually every mma site. The event seems to be a textbook example of what can go wrong (everything did). I wish these events got general coverage for something other than not paying the fighters. Astudent0 (talk) 16:36, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, T. Canens (talk) 15:36, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I'm also sufficient coverage to pass WP:GNG IMO. --TreyGeek (talk) 04:12, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Seems like there's enough coverage. Stuartyeates (talk) 03:19, 24 July 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.