Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of UFC champions/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was removed by PresN via FACBot (talk) 19:32:23 27 March 2019 (UTC) [1].
List of UFC champions edit
List of UFC champions (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Notified: User:Gsfelipe94, User:Matthew0820, User:BEDofRAZORS666; Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mixed martial arts, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lists
I am nominating this for featured list removal because I don't see how this is one of the best lists we have to offer. When it was promoted it was already shaky (and the review cursory), and since 2007 it's just accumulated poorly written, poorly verified material...cruft. (Those flags need to go too--there's a consensus for MMA that indeed they must go.) This revert alerted me to the poor stage of the article: the writing is obviously poor. As for the sourcing, it's all Sherdog and a couple other MMA sites, basically, which I'm sure is fine for individual results, but not so much for prose and it doesn't look good. And then, prominently, there's File:UFC-Champs.PNG, some homemade and atrocious thing dominated by national colors (in a sport that has no national representation), with ungrammaticalities ("none weight limit") and a sexist set-up (male is the norm, "female" needs to be marked). No, I'm sure the list is fine for what it is, but it is not a FL. Drmies (talk) 21:26, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist – In addition to the issues raised by Drmies, I don't see sourcing for most of the items in the tables of champions. There isn't even a general reference provided for the information. That is a disqualifier for FL status by itself. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:08, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Giants2008 I don't know enough about FL status to give a confident answer, but could you cite the policy that excludes articles from FL for sourcing reasons? Cheers, Pokerplayer513 (talk) 02:53, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- The featured list criteria state that all FLs must meet general "requirements for all Wikipedia content", including verifiability. Giants2008 (Talk) 23:23, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist - Some tables are entirely unsourced, major work would be needed to find the citations needed. Mattximus (talk) 13:31, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No work done in a large amount of time, consensus to delist, delisting. --PresN 19:32, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been removed, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.