Deletion of UK MMA Awards

Comment: Fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: per  This is the only real awards ceremony in UK MMA, should people be able to see who won what each year? I have added a few more references from other sources than the fight lounge..there is now no reason to delete
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: as failing |verification of |notability by |reliable sources.  Sockpuppet/meatpuppeting aside, in the end, it simply doesn't pass the criteria by having multiple sources that give |significant coverage (or any, for that matter) by independent sources.  Simply SAYING it is notable doesn't make it true, any more than saying I can fly means I am a bird
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:N||WP:RS||WP:SIGCOV)

Comment: as  and . Encourage transwiki to Edge MMA wiki. What's it about these MMA deletion procedures and rife socking? Just because the sport encourages battles, must supporters see this encyclopedia as a BATTLEGROUND? If these are merely sourcing issues, why can't some of these supporters pull some print sources out of magazines and apply them
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Recentism (WP:RECENTISM||WP:PROMOTION)

Comment: Fails , never mind .  No reliable sources proffered other than the primary source of this outfit's own website.  Serious  issues, in that the creator is associated with said website, and the  mentality isn't helping.  Why, look, there's even a |meatpuppet army.  (And good question there, Mdtemp.  We're not talking awards given out a generation ago or a century ago.  We're talking awards purportedly handed out ''last year.'' The reporting just doesn't "go away," and it's far simpler to imagine that it just never existed in the first place.  Of course, the Keep proponents can prove us wrong, if they wish
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:GNG||WP:COI||WP:BATTLEGROUND||WP:SOCK)

Comment: It appears that the only links I can find for these awards are by the website giving out the award (which apparently isn't notable enough to have an article about itself) and receivers of the awards.  I was unable to find any significant coverage by independent sources.  Thus fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: When I did a Google search I got 10 hits--that's less than my 90 year old grandmother and she makes no claims of notability.  While it's true that ghits can't be a determining factor, the fact that an on-line MMA site's award has so few ghits I think is significant.  Since the only sources seem to be the backers of the award (according to the article) and its recipients, it certainly seems to fail  and .  There's also no evidence to support Bigzmma's claim that there was lots of coverage when the award was given.  Otherwise, what happened to all of that reporting
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:V)