Deletion of UFC 11

Comment: Per , this event determined the champion of a top league so it satisfies the notability guideline
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SPORTSEVENT)

Comment: major event per 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SPORTSEVENT)

Comment: nbsp; The keep !votes seem focused on an alleged championship, but there is no championship mentioned in the article.&nbsp; There was not even a fight in the finals of the tournament, the opponent complained of "fatigue", an alternate had a broken hand, and a winner was declared by forfeit.&nbsp;  states, {{talkquote|Some games or series are inherently notablewhy?, including but not limited to the following:{{*}} The final series (or single game when there is not a series) determining the champion of a top league, e.g. 2009 Stanley Cup Finals, or 2009 All-Ireland Senior Football Championship Final, or Super Bowl XLIII, or 2006 UEFA Champions League Final}}Note that all of the examples listed are team sports.&nbsp; The counter-argument being passed around is that all UFC sports events deserve the status of the Stanley Cup Finals or the SuperBowl.&nbsp; Why should every event of one small company (Zuffa or SEG), get more coverage on Wikipedia than major league baseball?&nbsp; How is this is a "single game" that has determined the "championship of a top league" that is the equivalent of the Super Bowl or the Stanley Cup Finals?&nbsp; That would have been huge news if a Superbowl were won by forfeit.&nbsp; I've clicked on dozens of links at Google without finding any 1996 newspaper articles or even any secondary reliable coverage of any kind about the event, with one exception at yahoo.sports.com/mma.&nbsp; One can tell by the almost non-existant media coverage that the world at large does not consider this event to have the status of the Stanley Cup Finals or the Superbowl.&nbsp
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SPORTSEVENT)

Comment: nbsp; Article is totally unsourced, so it fails WP:V and there is nothing to consider for merging.&nbsp; As per , all of the body of this article needs to be removed.&nbsp; The nominator correctly notes that the topic fails , for example, given the absence of contemporaneous reports, the coverage doesn't even rise to the level of routine coverage.&nbsp; sports.yahoo.com/mma has a web report filed in 2009 possibly created by watching a video, so it seems credible that the event exists.&nbsp; sports.yahoo.com/mma routinely provides a web page for every UFC event.&nbsp;  states, "Notable events usually have significant impact over a wide region, domain, or widespread societal group." and "Significant national or international coverage is usually expected for an event to be notable."&nbsp; Balloon boy incident is sometimes mentioned as a  benchmark.&nbsp; Finally, our  policy states, "routine news reporting on things like...sports...is not a sufficient basis for inclusion in the encyclopedia."&nbsp
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:BURDEN||WP:EVENT||WP:NOT)

Comment: No evidence that the UFC 11 has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources to presume that it meets |general notability guideline. All coverage of the event falls into |routine coverage, so the article can only be at best a |news report, thus it is unsuitable as a topic since it fall into WP:!|what Wikipedia is not. Also, at that point in time the UFC was unregulated, it is not a sports league and the event itself did not receive significant non-routine coverage, so I do not think that it meets the |sports notability criteria for individual games or series. That guideline does not exempt the article from having to comply with the WP:!|what Wikipedia is not policy either
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:ROUTINE||WP:NOTNEWSPAPER||WP:SPORTSEVENT)