From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 keep. Arguments for deleting this article centre on the subject's supposed lack of significance, concerns over promotionalism, and the amateur and fairly out-of-the-blue nature of this fight. Keep !votes hinge on the coverage of this subject in reliable sources. These sources are not of the sort that can be dismissed out of hand, but those arguing for deletion have not convincingly demonstrated why they should not count towards meeting WP:GNG; indeed there generally isn't much engagement with the sources among the "delete" !votes. As such, no outcome other than keeping this is possible here. Vanamonde ( talk) 07:58, 25 August 2018 (UTC) reply

KSI vs Logan Paul

KSI vs Logan Paul (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Similar to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KSI vs. Joe Weller. A boxing match between two Youtubers, with insufficient non-promotional coverage. power~enwiki ( π, ν) 15:30, 22 July 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Boxing-related deletion discussions. PRehse ( talk) 15:34, 22 July 2018 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 15:58, 22 July 2018 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 15:58, 22 July 2018 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 12:45, 29 July 2018 (UTC) reply
Delete per nom. I guess my links just prove the noms point. "I also note the sources describe this as 'deeply embarrassing' and 'may be scrapped'." Not much shows that the fight is notable, if anything at all. Abequinn14 ( talk) 08:35, 31 July 2018 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 02:43, 5 August 2018 (UTC) reply
  • delete - I can see how this could provide some pop interest, but the boxers aren't professional (I'm aware this is also true at the Olympics). The first match wasn't notable, either. Even if kept, I'm not sure the title of the article is suitible. Lee Vilenski ( talkcontribs) 13:31, 6 August 2018 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - sufficient sources provided discussing the fight to pass GNG. The point that the fight is described as "deeply embarrassing" is irrelevant; GNG only requires coverage, not positivity. OZOO (t) (c) 10:58, 10 August 2018 (UTC) reply
  • Keep easily more than enough coverage to pass the general notability guidelines. 207.164.152.162 ( talk)
  • Keep - News sources are talking about the fight in the mainstream media and as such outlets are covering the fight, it would only be fair to suggest keeping the page up. See here, here, and finally, here. -- Pokkeballs17 ( talk), 12:55, 11 August 2018, (GMT)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 22:39, 12 August 2018 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 22:39, 12 August 2018 (UTC) reply
  • Strong Keep due to recent involvement between the two that has attracted millions of viewers worth of attention on KSI's channel, Logan Paul's channel, other Celeb channels (e.g. PewDiePie) in addition to countless YouTube news channels and even some Mainstream Media. Currently, this page reaches 2,500 daily views without fail (possibly due to deletion nomination, but still is a ton for a deletion nomination page–those usually just get 100 daily) and sometimes passes 3,000 making it relevant enough to keep. This definitely needs a 2nd deletion nomination after the drama between the two dies down someday and this page becomes irrelevant. Redditaddict69 (click here if I screwed up stuff again) (edits) 02:59, 13 August 2018 (UTC) reply

*Keep Mainstream media coverage aswell as thousands of tickets being sold at one of the UK's largest arenas. [1] User:TheMasterGuru

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty ( talk) 19:24, 13 August 2018 (UTC) reply
@ L3X1: did you mean "Delete - fails the GNG", or "Keep - meets the GNG"? power~enwiki ( π, ν) 00:26, 14 August 2018 (UTC) reply
@ Power~enwiki: yes. FBDB
Regards, SshibumXZ ( Talk) ( Contributions). 01:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC) reply
Sorry all, I miswrote. Thanks, L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 18:45, 14 August 2018 (UTC) reply
@ RoySmith: WP:10YT isn't a reason to delete, if anything, it seems a reason to keep for the time being and see how coverage develops after the event: "Just wait and see...Editors writing today do not have a historical perspective on today's events, and should not pretend to have a crystal ball." The essay 10YT is a part of even cautions against using it as a reason for deletion, from the first section of WP:RECENTISM: "Over-use of recent material does not by itself mean that an article should be deleted...". The essay is about how to cover notable recent events, not determining the notability of an event. Wugapodes [thɔk] [ˈkan.ˌʧɻɪbz] 21:15, 24 August 2018 (UTC) reply
  • Keep — Struck previous comment for this updated one. Mainstream media coverage (from sources such as BBC and Sky News) as well as thousands of tickets being sold at one of the UK's largest arenas. Also expecting this fight to break multiple armature boxing ticket sales (which are expected to sell out the venue with 21,000 ticket sales [2]) and views and maybe even break boxing pay-per-view numbers. In addition, multiple professional boxing personalities are involved and have taken interest. In addition to the over 50,000 page views this page has received in the past week and promises to be much higher come fight night. More than enough to pass GNG. [3] [4] TheMasterGuru ( talk) 15:29, 24 August 2018 (UTC) reply

References

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.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 keep. Arguments for deleting this article centre on the subject's supposed lack of significance, concerns over promotionalism, and the amateur and fairly out-of-the-blue nature of this fight. Keep !votes hinge on the coverage of this subject in reliable sources. These sources are not of the sort that can be dismissed out of hand, but those arguing for deletion have not convincingly demonstrated why they should not count towards meeting WP:GNG; indeed there generally isn't much engagement with the sources among the "delete" !votes. As such, no outcome other than keeping this is possible here. Vanamonde ( talk) 07:58, 25 August 2018 (UTC) reply

KSI vs Logan Paul

KSI vs Logan Paul (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Similar to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KSI vs. Joe Weller. A boxing match between two Youtubers, with insufficient non-promotional coverage. power~enwiki ( π, ν) 15:30, 22 July 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Boxing-related deletion discussions. PRehse ( talk) 15:34, 22 July 2018 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 15:58, 22 July 2018 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 15:58, 22 July 2018 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 12:45, 29 July 2018 (UTC) reply
Delete per nom. I guess my links just prove the noms point. "I also note the sources describe this as 'deeply embarrassing' and 'may be scrapped'." Not much shows that the fight is notable, if anything at all. Abequinn14 ( talk) 08:35, 31 July 2018 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 02:43, 5 August 2018 (UTC) reply
  • delete - I can see how this could provide some pop interest, but the boxers aren't professional (I'm aware this is also true at the Olympics). The first match wasn't notable, either. Even if kept, I'm not sure the title of the article is suitible. Lee Vilenski ( talkcontribs) 13:31, 6 August 2018 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - sufficient sources provided discussing the fight to pass GNG. The point that the fight is described as "deeply embarrassing" is irrelevant; GNG only requires coverage, not positivity. OZOO (t) (c) 10:58, 10 August 2018 (UTC) reply
  • Keep easily more than enough coverage to pass the general notability guidelines. 207.164.152.162 ( talk)
  • Keep - News sources are talking about the fight in the mainstream media and as such outlets are covering the fight, it would only be fair to suggest keeping the page up. See here, here, and finally, here. -- Pokkeballs17 ( talk), 12:55, 11 August 2018, (GMT)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 22:39, 12 August 2018 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 22:39, 12 August 2018 (UTC) reply
  • Strong Keep due to recent involvement between the two that has attracted millions of viewers worth of attention on KSI's channel, Logan Paul's channel, other Celeb channels (e.g. PewDiePie) in addition to countless YouTube news channels and even some Mainstream Media. Currently, this page reaches 2,500 daily views without fail (possibly due to deletion nomination, but still is a ton for a deletion nomination page–those usually just get 100 daily) and sometimes passes 3,000 making it relevant enough to keep. This definitely needs a 2nd deletion nomination after the drama between the two dies down someday and this page becomes irrelevant. Redditaddict69 (click here if I screwed up stuff again) (edits) 02:59, 13 August 2018 (UTC) reply

*Keep Mainstream media coverage aswell as thousands of tickets being sold at one of the UK's largest arenas. [1] User:TheMasterGuru

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty ( talk) 19:24, 13 August 2018 (UTC) reply
@ L3X1: did you mean "Delete - fails the GNG", or "Keep - meets the GNG"? power~enwiki ( π, ν) 00:26, 14 August 2018 (UTC) reply
@ Power~enwiki: yes. FBDB
Regards, SshibumXZ ( Talk) ( Contributions). 01:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC) reply
Sorry all, I miswrote. Thanks, L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 18:45, 14 August 2018 (UTC) reply
@ RoySmith: WP:10YT isn't a reason to delete, if anything, it seems a reason to keep for the time being and see how coverage develops after the event: "Just wait and see...Editors writing today do not have a historical perspective on today's events, and should not pretend to have a crystal ball." The essay 10YT is a part of even cautions against using it as a reason for deletion, from the first section of WP:RECENTISM: "Over-use of recent material does not by itself mean that an article should be deleted...". The essay is about how to cover notable recent events, not determining the notability of an event. Wugapodes [thɔk] [ˈkan.ˌʧɻɪbz] 21:15, 24 August 2018 (UTC) reply
  • Keep — Struck previous comment for this updated one. Mainstream media coverage (from sources such as BBC and Sky News) as well as thousands of tickets being sold at one of the UK's largest arenas. Also expecting this fight to break multiple armature boxing ticket sales (which are expected to sell out the venue with 21,000 ticket sales [2]) and views and maybe even break boxing pay-per-view numbers. In addition, multiple professional boxing personalities are involved and have taken interest. In addition to the over 50,000 page views this page has received in the past week and promises to be much higher come fight night. More than enough to pass GNG. [3] [4] TheMasterGuru ( talk) 15:29, 24 August 2018 (UTC) reply

References

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.

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook