Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2012 in UFC events (4th nomination)

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2012 December 18.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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 delete. Relevant redirects to this page are retargeted to List of UFC events in 2012. Der yck C. 23:26, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2012 in UFC events

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This page has deteriorated into a completely useless redirect page. The discussion for omnibussing UFC articles was long argued and ultimately decided upon as a bad idea. The structure has returned to the single page articles with a significantly increased emphasis on improving article quality. This omnibus page has become literally just a redirect to subomnibusses which are equally as useless and worthless. There is no value added and this page should be deleted. I remember halloween (talk) 19:26, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 August 14. Snotbot t • c » 19:49, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This page has completely fallen apart from its original intent. It has been subdivided into subomnibusses that are not maintained and provide no relevant or useful information. It's time to put this abomination to sleep once and for all.I remember halloween (talk) 19:57, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete With the sub-pages now in effect, it makes little sense to have the same information on this page as it become redundant. All of the information has been removed and placed on their respective quarterly category pages. Udar55 (talk) 20:25, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nomination and per delete vote reasonings immediately above.Oxycut (talk) 10:25, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Since we have the quarterly pages now this page is quite redundant.192.249.47.196 (talk) 12:13, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. 15:29, 15 August 2012 (UTC) • Gene93k (talk) 15:29, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this page really isn't useable anymore - I support the original nomination. One factor for this that previously hasn't been recognised is the massive expansion of the number of UFC cards since the UFC-FOX deal, which makes an omnibus article like this unworkable now (where it may have previously worked prior).Trok333 (talk) 06:29, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Useless and worthless, however true, are not sufficient criteria for deleting wiki pages on this specific subject when wiki inside interests are intent on keeping them. The nominator needs to look through the byzantine of wiki bylaws to look for some technicality that can be argue for this case, and hope that an admin hostile to the sport doesn't just arbitrarily decide against it anyway as has been historically the case. Best of luck and hope this stays under the radar. Agent00f (talk) 07:52, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this page adds no value especially since we have four sub omnibuses, which makes this page redundant.Paul "The Wall" (talk) 22:57, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment to closing admin: if this does get deleted, the redirect pages UFC on FX: Guillard vs. Miller and UFC on Fox: Evans vs. Davis need to be changed to point to the sub-articles, but both are currently fully-protected. No opinion on deletion, since it makes little difference to either content or organisation whether we have an index of the four sub-articles or not. Alzarian16 (talk) 18:14, 21 August 2012 (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.