- 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 merge to Amaury Bitetti . MBisanz talk 02:54, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Bitetti Combat (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)
I found nothing to show this organization meets WP:ORG. The only coverage is routine sports coverage about upcoming fight cards or results. There's no significant independent coverage of the organization and it doesn't matter who founded it or who was going to be a ref at one of their events. Mdtemp (talk) 17:52, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Mdtemp (talk) 17:52, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Keep. passes WP:GNG. If it is big enough for ESPN to cover I'd say it is notable and worthy of Wikipedia; regardless of what country it is from. PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 00:52, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Please search Google Brazil if you are going to do a basic notability search. you will see that it easily passes any once through of that search engine. PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 00:57, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 16:43, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 16:43, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment When I searched Google Brazil the first page was full of either fight results or announcements of upcoming fights. Both of these fall under WP:ROUTINE. If you have some good translations that show notability, please add them to the article. Papaursa (talk) 22:26, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Seeing as this is an organization, and not an event, what you present about wp:routine is not applicable. However, Passes WP:ORG specifically WP:ORGDEPTH. PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 04:58, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- If I spoke Portuguese maybe. Otherwise, I'm not leaving it up to google translate. Actually, google chrome translate it, albeit poorly. That is where the info comes from for the Portuguese refs. I was careful with the parts I pulled out from there. Pretty much I pulled basic info, because the sentences that google chrome produces aren't very coherant. I don't know why you would disregard the first two English refs on this page as they are non trivial/incidental. Trivial/incidental ≠ Routine. Whether it is routine or not does not matter. What does matter is that the mentions are not trivial/incidental. Like I said earlier, ESPN reported on one of their events, plus all the other refs = Keep via wp:org AND WP:GNG . For what it's worth, I pulled this quote from the mmajunkie(a part of USA Today) article about Arona
- The show took place at the 19,000-seat Maracanazinho in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and aired nationally on pay-per-view.PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 04:36, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Last week's Baltimore-Denver game was seen be 80,000 live with temperatures 25 degrees below freezing plus tens of millions of people watching, yet it's not notable. Your argument doesn't wash. In addition, I don't see how WP:ORGDEPTH is met. You dismiss my routine coverage comment, yet you quote a guideline that requires "a level of attention that extends well beyond routine announcements." As far as translations go, you might want to look at WP:NONENG, especially when your whole claim of notability is based on them. Papaursa (talk) 19:28, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge/Redirect to Amaury Bitetti I don't presently see the sources necessary to support a claim of notability for this organization, but it could be included in Bitetti's article. Papaursa (talk) 19:28, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:45, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to Amaury Bitetti The organization is already mentioned in Amaury Bitetti's article, but I didn't find the coverage necessary to show the organiztion meets WP:GNG or WP:ORG. 204.126.132.231 (talk) 15:36, 23 January 2013 (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.