Talk:UFC 146

This article was nominated for deletion on 24 April 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus.

File:UFC 146 JDS Overeem.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:UFC 146 JDS Overeem.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 25 March 2012

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:UFC 146 JDS Overeem.jpg)

An updated version of the fight poster has been released and should be used in the header of this article. The image can be found here: http://a1.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/148907_408992675802291_164694416898786_1333377_1355187643_n.jpg Grec530 (talk) 17:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 02:37, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Card should be locked for the time being

Too much vandalism going on for UFC 146 and 2012 in UFC events concerning the Alistair Overeem drug test failure. Cards should be locked until the UFC makes a decision on UFC 146 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autokid15 (talk • contribs) 00:05, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Now someone's added Fedor there, without a source of course. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.194.170.200 (talk) 09:43, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This vandalism is out of control. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.162.131.3 (talk) 11:15, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed as well. It stands correct at the moment and should be locked until at least closer to the event. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrghetto602 (talk • contribs) 13:56, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please shorten the "Notes" text then, because you've prevented me from doing it. Just have it say "On PPV card following X vs Y", so that it doesn't force two lines. It reads poorly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.203.121.38 (talk) 04:05, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection

I have protected the article for a month based on the extremely large number of problematic edits made from anonymous IP contributors over the last few days and the longer term history of vandalism over the previous month. If you are an anonymous contributor, please see Summary of benefits and if you still do not want to create a named account, you can make an edit request, highlighted using {{edit semi-protected}}, on this page. Requests for protection on articles can be made at Requests for page protection. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 07:03, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Let's move that mini-novel about one failed drug test to Overeem's article.

Sure, it deserves a mention here, but a sentence or maybe two should do it. Just that he was booked against Junior, blew a test and was replaced by Mir. It doesn't need to be an entire section, and certainly not over half the article! Undue weight, if I've ever seen it. My cut & paste functionality is severely limited on this browser, so I'll give some time for someone else to do it. If not, it gets backspaced into oblivion. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:40, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone please...

...move the info about the Nelson/Gonzaga/etc. shakeup to the section about the other card changes? It seems far better suited there, but technical limitations prevent me on this computer. Thank you. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:50, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I got it. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:01, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stipe Miočić's stoppage

I dispute Stipe Miočić's stoppage.

I was not a TKO. He tapped, the referee stepped in. Bruce Buffer annonced, "a stop to this contest", but it was not a TKO, but a "Submission (strikes)". I dispute it and we should confirm this by official sources. Mazter00 (talk) 04:03, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I retract my statement, it was a TKO. Official source at UFC.com and several sources says TKO. Mazter00 (talk) 05:30, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

I have tagged this for notability, please do not remove until reliable secondary sources are quoted. Please remember that most news reports are primary sources. Mt king ^(edits) 05:26, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could you give us examples of wiki articles of sports events with reliable secondary sources?

Thanks for your concern Mtking, but world media has already reported on this, including USA Today. LA Times, Las Vegas Sun, Sports Illustrated and many others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SlightlyInsane (talk • contribs) 20:25, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here are 103,000 sources.--50.140.37.201 (talk) 21:08, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They are routine primary news reports and do not go to addressing suitability for an encyclopaedia entry. Mt king ^(edits) 00:44, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I got an idea... instead of posting shitty notes on the top of the page, how about help out with finding good sources. You like to criticize but you never like to help out unless it is to get an article deleted. Gamezero05 (talk) 02:22, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Just because most newspaper articles are primary sources does not mean that these articles are not reliable and often highly desirable independent sources." From WP:PRIMARYNEWS. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:48, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is use for determining notability. Mt king ^(edits) 03:00, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mtking, you still didn't answer my question. Could you post a few wiki articles of recent sports events with reliable secondary sources? I need some of examples of such events, so that I know what exactly to look for. Evenfiel (talk) 05:00, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm with Evenfiel. Why is Mtking so reluctant to provide examples? He's setting stricter rules for MMA pages. --SlightlyInsane (talk) 09:39, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Mtking, please clarify secondary sources. I am looking at the 2012 French Open page and it looks like it has all primary sources. If it has secondary sources, please point those out to help the MMA community as an example to look out for. No one would dare remove the 2012 French Open page due to lack of secondary sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.67.19.113 (talk) 15:17, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PRIMARYNEWS states that certain kinds of news stories don't qualify as secondary sources, but I've given it a fairly close reading and been unable to find anything in PRIMARYNEWS that directly states that primary sources are insufficient to establish encyclopedic notability. The relevant material I can find on the matter, in the 'primary, secondary, and tertiary sources' section of WP:NOR, directly states that primary sources *are* sufficiently reliable to establish notability, so long as certain criteria about not analyzing, synthesizing, interpreting, or evaluating material from primary sources are met. Nothing I can find in this article contradicts the relevant portion of WP:NOR. Unless you can further explain your objection to specific sections of analysis, synthesis, interpretation or evaluation in this article, or enlighten me as to what other relevant Wikipedia guidelines the article is violating, I think we're done here. -Toptomcat (talk) 23:41, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Most news reports for MMA events would qualify as secondary sources per WP:PRIMARYNEWS. MMA newspaper reports are more akin to analytical reports that collect, compare, and analyze information, rather than simple reporting on an event.AugustWest1980 (talk) 17:29, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cool looking table! One suggestion.

If we have a Winner column and a Loser column, we don't need an untitled column with a bunch of "defeated". InedibleHulk (talk) 06:09, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've been working on a whole new table here: User:Gamezero05/Gamezero05 Sandbox/newest results table, and it looks good on it's own, but if I try and paste it here on the UFC 146 page, it messes everything up. Does anybody know how to fix this? Gamezero 05 03:54, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That does look nicer without all the lines. But no, sorry, I'm a table noob (first table edit ever here today, after seven Wikiyears!) and can't offer any technical advice. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:30, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Figured it out. Does that look good or no? Gamezero 05 00:18, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd rather see the second row (the headings) coloured for contrast, but that's not a huge concern. Looks good, overall. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:37, 17 June 2012 (UTC) Maybe move the headers above Main Card, turn them red and turn Main Card black to match the prelim cards. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:40, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the headers above the main card and it didn't look right. I then decided red and black might not be the best color combination. I changed to colors to be more neutral and match the rest of Wikipedia. I did color the second row for contrast. Gamezero 05 19:21, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:29, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on UFC 146. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120526093722/http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-ufc-dos-santos-mir-20120526,0,5401570.story to http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-ufc-dos-santos-mir-20120526,0,5401570.story

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:27, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]