![]() | This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2016 April 25. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
![]() | This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2013 January 4. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
The result was delete. Complete analysis follows.
OK. Argument for deletion (distilled down) is:
Now, we go down the arguments.
So, in the end, the argument with the greatest policy based weight was that the coverage of the event is routine for this class of sports event. The efforts to refute that were flawed by two basic problems:
The efforts to refute WP:NOT#CRYSTAL hinged on finding UFC 157 notable in the first place, so the same problems with evaluating the notability of UFC 157 vs. the notability of Rousey and Carmouche apply.
The interrelationship between USA Today and MMAjunkie.com also weakens all arguments based on diversity of sources.—Kww(talk) 20:30, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]