Deletion of UFC 145

Comment: for now. Article needs improvement but otherwise passes . Disagree that article fails  given the fact that there was (apparently) a championship bout featuring one of the (apparently) more notable fighters in the sport
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:EVENT)

Comment: Nomination has been advertised as being disruptive to ongoing RFC. Article is a breakout of notable topic list of UFC events that it is inappropriate to merge there due to balance (see ). '''Merge''' is possible. But most important, an ongoing local agreement of how to prevent disruptive AFDs needs to be forged first
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Summary style (WP:SS)

Comment: How's that for a screwed up !vote? :)  The article in it's current state, with no other research is a '''delete'''.  It contains only |routine information about fight results and changes to the fight card.  The article contains no well-sourced prose discussing the notable aspects of the event as requested by .  The article currently cites only a single non-MMA related source which on the face is a borderline failing of .  That said, it appears there are more non-MMA related sources that could be cited.  Since the event included a championship event, this event could pass the SNG I've accepted at  (though that discussion isn't really going anywhere at the moment) if it included more sources and more prose.  I'm willing to help write that prose as I did for UFC 140 during it's AfD if the !votes suggest that it won't be an easy delete.  Therefore, with those improvements, which I'm willing to help out with, '''keep
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ROUTINE||WP:SPORTSEVENT||WP:GNG||WP:MMANOT)

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: While Mtking wishes to spout off about this event's lack of (enduring) |notability, s/he conveniently ignores any source that may disprove his/her point.  The Globe and Mail had at least three in-depth articles about individual fights leading up to the event (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/more-sports/canadian-rory-macdonald-feeling-no-pressure-ahead-of-ufc-145-co-main-event/article4101405/, http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/more-sports/jones-evans-ready-to-settle-bitter-rivalry-at-ufc-145/article4101407/, http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/more-sports/hominick-ready-to-prove-he-still-belongs-at-top-of-145-pound-ladder/article4101123/), while The Daily Telegraph|the Telegraph had at least two articles about the rivaly in the main event (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/ufc/9217286/Jones-vs.-Evans-Timeline.html, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/ufc/9217140/Jones-and-Evans-rivalry-to-culminate-at-UFC-145.html).  Such articles cannot be considered simply |routine.  Does this prove ''enduring'' notability?  Perhaps not.  But it is very difficult to find sources that would indicate that, for instance, the 1991 Monte Carlo Open – Singles|1991 Monte Carlo Open or even America's Next Top Model, Cycle 17 has any enduring notability.  But, as per Wikipedia guidelines, |notability is not temporary, and I quote: "once a topic has been the subject of 'significant coverage' in accordance with the general notability guideline, ''it does not need to have ongoing coverage''" (emphasis mine).  The fact remains that this was one of the major events run by the world's leading mixed martial arts organisation, which included a championship fight.  I can understand perhaps relegating UFC on Fox events (and their like) to secondary, not-individually-notable status, but Mtking has gone way too far in his/her |fanatical Wikipedia:Don't be prejudiced|dislike for anything related to the UFC
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTE||WP:ROUTINE||WP:NTEMP||WP:FANATIC)

Comment: Agree that work is to be done on the article, but AfD is not for clean up. And per above, it does pass . It also clearly passes 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:EVENT||WP:GNG)

Comment: This event does not fail . Jon Jones retaining the title was a catalyst in setting up UFC 151: Jones vs Henderson. Other wins and losses affect other future matchmaking, passing .  and  are easily passed (though this currently isn't demonstrated as clearly as it could be).  is demonstrated in pre-fight analysis of fights stemming from UFC 145 fights, but can not be demonstrated until that analysis is written.  is unclear. The article has references from three unique reliable sources; how many would you prefer?  does not apply. These are not like hockey or baseball games, which occur 82 (or so) per season per team. There are about 20 UFC shows per year and they are scheduled dynamically, depending on rankings, fighter popularity, injuries and feuds (all of which result from previous events). I hope that's enough policy for you
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:EVENT||WP:EFFECT||WP:GEOSCOPE||WP:INDEPTH||WP:PERSISTENCE||WP:DIVERSE||WP:ROUTINE)

Comment: we don't have articles about every fight and every sporting event that takes place. This fight doesn't seem to be particularly unusual or |notable
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)