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. czar 06:55, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

MMA organizations[edit]

MMA organizations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

This "article" that has no aspects of article is an ugly mix of concoction of semi-notable lists. The listing of 50 TOP ... is subjective and seems to be more an compilation of passing editors. If any parts are worth saving then maybe they can be extracted, however, in its current form it is not an encyclopaedic article or a reasonable list. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:08, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:12, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:12, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:08, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:48, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Article appears to be just a large directory of non notable list topics and entries. Not encyclopedic. Ajf773 (talk) 05:09, 14 June 2017 (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.