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 redirect to 2003 in Pride FC. Consensus is that the article does not meet the notability guidelines and a reasonable redirect has been suggested. Davewild ( talk) 07:14, 17 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Pride Total Elimination 2003

Pride Total Elimination 2003 (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Fails WP:EVENT. Purely a results listing. And a qualifying event for another event LibStar ( talk) 16:23, 30 May 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse ( talk) 08:35, 31 May 2015 (UTC) reply

• Delete Article has no sources and my search just produced routine sports results reporting. The event had some notable fighters, but there's nothing to show this meets WP:NEVENT. Papaursa ( talk) 17:27, 31 May 2015 (UTC) reply
• Delete - I'm more inclined to delete because there aren't good sources aside from finding this and this (Black Belt magazine, three separate pages). I would've suggested moving elsewhere but it seems that's not an option. SwisterTwister talk 20:58, 31 May 2015 (UTC) reply
• Keep, as per my rationale in the last AFD discussion (i.e. that it meets the WP:GNG). There's an article providing extensive coverage in this issue of *Black Belt* magazine, starting on page 52, and there's several pages' worth of quality coverage in Chuck Liddell's autobiography, starting on page 177. It would also be nice to see someone bother to ask a native Japanese speaker to do a quick search for Japanese-language sources, given that it's an event that happened in Japan in an era from which few webpages still remain online. For instance, I can pretty much guarantee that the (now print-defunct) Kamipro magazine would have a big ol' article. Probably easier to just delete it, though - building an encyclopedia is hard work! - 208.81.148.195 ( talk) 00:14, 1 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Liddell's autobiography is not an independent source and the Black Belt article is just a detailed report on the fights--in other words, routine sports coverage just like a baseball game's play by play. Mdtemp ( talk) 16:14, 1 June 2015 (UTC) reply

• Delete No significant independent coverage. Mdtemp ( talk) 16:14, 1 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:16, 2 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:17, 2 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Keep Pride is notable and as a result this is notable. Article needs to be expanded. 71.183.12.120 ( talk) 18:56, 2 June 2015 (UTC) reply

WP:ITSNOTABLE is not a reason for keeping. LibStar ( talk) 03:42, 5 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Major league baseball is also notable, but that doesn't make every MLB game notable. Papaursa ( talk) 20:10, 6 June 2015 (UTC) reply

• Keep or Merge I would prefer to see this article sourced than deleted. If that doesn't happen i would see a second option to move the data into 2003 in Pride FC. There are a few UFC events that only exist on the omnibus articles for their respective year, for example UFC Fight Night: Stevenson vs Guillard. To date i haven't seen any controversy with this use of events within the omnibus articles, hopefully i don't cause any by bringing it up here. All the links in the Infobox for the event and the UFC Events template at the bottom of the article work the same as if it were a stand alone article. Kevlar ( talk) 22:17, 4 June 2015 (UTC) reply
• Redirect to 2003 in Pride FC I have changed my earlier vote based on the information provided by Kevlar. The basic facts haven't changed--there's nothing to show this was a notable event, the article doesn't list a single source, and all my search found was the usual routine sports coverage. Since the entire contents of this article is basically a list of the results, all of this information is already in the Pride 2003 article. Therefore, I see no reason to keep an article on a non-notable event, especially when all of the pertinent information will still be available on WP. Papaursa ( talk) 20:10, 6 June 2015 (UTC) reply

• Comment: My initial thought was "What a fight card!" Those are big names. Pride is also a major MMA organization. However, is one event notable by itself? Was there something particularly notable that occurred? I cannot tell from the article or searching online whether that is the case. WP:MMAEVENT probably presents the relevant guideline for analysis.-- Rpclod ( talk) 04:18, 10 June 2015 (UTC) reply
• Redirect per Papaursa; otherwise Delete. There aren't any sources that don't involve routine sports coverage of the sort explicitly debarred by WP:ROUTINE. Nha Trang ^Allons! 15:51, 10 June 2015 (UTC) reply
• Delete or redirect No significant independent coverage and nothing to show WP:NEVENT is met. Jakejr ( talk) 02:35, 15 June 2015 (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.