I have seen all your contributions to Wikipedia. You are by far the best editor in WP:MMA

		The MMA Barnstar
		I, LlamaAl, hereby award Paralympiakos the The MMA Barnstar for his/her valued contributions to WikiProject MMA. Awarded 02:55, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! All the best for the future. Paralympiakos (talk) 16:00, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Cody Bollinger (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to San Jacinto

Michael Willian Costa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Granja

Nordine Taleb (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Halifax, Nova Scotia

Sam Alvey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Chihuahua, Mexico

UFC 120 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Newcastle, England

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Paralympiakos (talk) 23:22, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's nice to see you back editing MMA articles, even if we don't always agree about notability. Papaursa (talk) 23:16, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Always a pleasure! I know, as you say, that we may disagree about things like notability, but at least people like us help the project. Hopefully I'll be able to work on something with you in the future. Much love. Paralympiakos (talk) 23:22, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good work! I was thinking of doing this myself, but it'd be a chore with a Playstation. Thank you and your superior word processing machine. I like to consider all wins notable, like links in a chain. Same goes for losses. Strange how notable losses are never trumpeted. Subjective, indeed! InedibleHulk (talk) 02:11, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, sunshine. I feel like an arse removing everything, but frankly, it's all so subjective. My personal favourite was seeing "notable wins over James Irvin and Houston Alexander". Never had the phrase "X-Arm IS FOR REAL!" popped into my head before. I also want to get rid of all of the "UFC debut" stuff from MMA records. I saw Tyron Woodley's record say SF debut, which was his third fight. Almost as though my eyes couldn't strain four inches to the left! WP can be a humourous thing. Paralympiakos (talk) 02:20, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Like you said, you weren't really removing anything; it's still in the body and table. I wouldn't mind seeing the debut stuff gone either, but it doesn't exactly bother me. As long as UFC has its own section, it's clear who the debut was against. When I watch Woodley's fights, my eyes strain to stay open. I don't know what they'd do if I attempted to read about them. If you'd like to delete his entire article, I won't object. Future generations won't miss it. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:05, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, I'm rather confused as to how editing Thiago Alves' page is considered vandalism. I had seen footage of the fight finish, and saw that the time on his page didn't match up with the time from the time in the gif.

That being said, it looks like you've put a lot of work in to MMA pages here on wikipedia, so keep up the good work!

Bananaman Anderson-Smith (talk) 16:16, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As per Sherdog's database, Alves finished the fight at 0:34, not 0:24. I took your changes to be in bad faith and disruptive, as it was against all sources, not discussed and not sourced (to suggest it was 0:24. Considering you're now willing to discuss this, I retract the warning, but I still maintain that it was 0:34, as that is sourced. Paralympiakos (talk) 16:28, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. In any case, this gif speaks for itself, so take from it what you will.

Bananaman Anderson-Smith (talk) 06:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The submission for this event and both of the fighters pages (Volkman and Roller) were changed to a neck crank. The actual submission used was a neck crank since he wasn't under the chin and didn't have pressure on the arteries, however Bruce Buffer announced it as a Read Naked Choke. When I tried to fix Bruce Buffer's mistake on the Jones/Belfort fight you kept changing it back and gave me a hard time. I was wondering how is it going to be. Is it supposed to be put in as whatever Bruce Buffer calls it or is it supposed to be put in as the proper submission? --Willdawg111 (talk) 04:51, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, are you the "BigdawgMartialArts" guy who thought he could get a tweet from Bones himself about that daft DWL situation? Paralympiakos (talk) 11:32, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:36, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Paralympiakos, current consensus at the MMA project is that flag icons do not belong in the fight records tables of MMA fighters. I get that you don't agree with this -- you are not alone in that. Bring it up again at the project's talk page and get the consensus view changed and then add the flag icons. That said, till you can get the consensus changed please respect the consensus view that was achieved and do not add flag icons to those tables. Thanks. SQGibbon (talk) 02:39, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Simply put, it is not consensus. You and a couple of other editors decided that, whereas the majority of MMA editors disagreed. However, your group were the ones constantly removing the flags, yet handing out the 3RR messages despite your own repeated 3RR violations. I disagree with your stance and I have no desire to restart this tiresome issue at WP:MMA. It never works out because both sides are too bullish. The last time this discussion took place, someone made wholesale changes to the WP:MMA page. Such things as no event names (even though the UFC recognises the event as, for example, "UFC 152: Jones vs. Belfort," not just "UFC 152") were added, as was "no capitalised methods" (which again makes no sense, as methods such as "Kimura" are named after people and are as such, proper nouns which should not be in lower case). Good day. Paralympiakos (talk) 02:45, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ricardo Tirloni, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Santa Catarina (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:00, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Paralympiakos. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RusFighters Sport Club.
Message added 00:50, 12 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Wingtipvorte^X PTT ∅ 00:50, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Mike Richman. Since you had some involvement with the Mike Richman redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). TimBentley (talk) 03:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Norman Parke, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Antrim (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:53, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In WP:MMA, for the fighter`s records, it says that "In the column Opponent, do not add flag icons before the name of the opponent. Per MOS:ICON, the consensus in Wikipedia is that flag icons should not be used to emphasize nationality without good reason. Flag icons for sportspeople should only be used in a sporting sense, that is, only when they are representing a national squad/team or for representative nationality in a competition, not legal nationality. There is no international sport governing body in MMA and MMA events are mainly handled by individual promotions. As such, MMA fighters do not represent their countries in a sporting sense, so flag icons do not serve an encyclopedic purpose. Flag icons should not be added only because they look good, because aesthetics are in the eye of the beholder: one reader's harmless decoration may be another reader's distraction", hence I don't you should keep on adding them to the Anderson Silva article.Evenfiel (talk) 14:59, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, it does! Do you know who added this? SQGibbon and his 1 or 2 likeminded friends! It's not policy, it's a guideline set by some deluded individual who thought that 2 or 3 people formed a consensus, when the clear majority disagreed. The consensus is FOR the flags, not against. Paralympiakos (talk) 15:53, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus is not determined by vote, please read WP:VOTE. In this case MOS:ICON very clearly indicated that flag icons were not to be used in these MMA tables and no one came up with a convincing interpretation of the situation or the guideline to allow for flags to be used. The default position then is to go along with the Wikipedia community-wide consensus. If you have a compelling argument that is in line with Wikipedia policies and guidelines then please present it at WT:MMA and perhaps a new consensus can be achieved. In the meantime please respect the efforts of not only the editors who hashed out this consensus at WP:MMA but also at the Wikipedia Manual of Style. Thanks. SQGibbon (talk) 19:22, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus is also not achieved by three editors bullying others by quoting WP guidelines. The fact is, there is no RULE saying that the icons cannot be used; only a guideline, so it is up to the consensus. The majority of productive editors (not deletionists like yourself) made good arguments for it and we achieved consensus FOR the icons, despite what you say. I'm confused as to why you think consensus was achieved to remove the icons, as that simply never happened. I'll never understand why people come to wikipedia to not actually help with the writing, but to just enforce their own wishes upon projects. We were the ones who achieved consensus saying they should stay. Please respect the efforts of us content-creators who actually make this project and those who discussed this at WT:MMA. Paralympiakos (talk) 19:58, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As editors we are expected to follow the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia, please read WP:GUIDELINE. Guidelines are not suggestions but are the community-wide consensus of what are best practices. MOS:ICON is clear about where flag icons are not to be used and it looks pretty clear that MMA fighter record tables is just one such place. I've looked through some of the threads at WT:MMA again and did not find a single good argument for keeping flag icons that was also in line with the guideline at MOS:ICON. Could you point to one please? Also, it might help to read WP:AGF and maybe even WP:CIVIL. I work very hard to help make Wikipedia the best encyclopedia it can be and in doing so I follow, to the best of my knowledge, the policies and guidelines in place. If/when those policies and guidelines change I accept that and edit accordingly even if I disagree. Again, current consensus at WP:MMA is to follow MOS:ICON and not use flag icons. Instead of edit-warring please start up a new discussion and change consensus. SQGibbon (talk) 21:07, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here we go again. Instead of constantly quoting WP:whatever, talk like a human being. MOS is a guideline, not a rule, so lets not wave that around like it is the law. You may think you try to make wikipedia a good place, but to my mind, you're more focused on arguments and inciting conflict than actually contributing by writing the content. Now, instead of making thinly veiled threats by flashing around this AGF and civil stuff, how about you drop the issue and admit that consensus was to keep them in? I've looked through WT:MMA at the topic from way-back-when and have seen far more arguments to keep them in than I did to remove them. Constantly going through and quoting WP:etc isn't a way to discuss the matter and that was all I saw from your band. Everything you've said, e.g. "instead of edit-warring" applies directly to yourself, so I would suggest that you stop too. If you wish to change the consensus in your own favour, then bring it up again at WT:MMA. :) Paralympiakos (talk) 21:25, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. There is yet another discussion happening at the MMA talk page concerning this issue so this would be a good opportunity for you to present your views. SQGibbon (talk) 15:24, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Paralympiakos. You have new messages at JamesBWatson's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

JamesBWatson (talk) 20:53, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What can we do to stop Mtking from ruining MMA coverage on Wikipedia? Polyh3dron (talk) 23:18, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to join the discussion at WT:MMA#MMA_Event_Notability. Kevlar (talk) 19:05, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think you might like to have a look at the outcome of the RfC on flags in MMA articles here. Mtking ^(edits) 19:07, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You obviously know my stance on the matter. I do not consider a matter whereby 6 oppose and 5 are for, to be consensus. Looking at it, each side has points, but no one side has a more rational argument. Therefore, I reject that essay and its outcome. If you wish to participate in the project, you are of course free to do so, but please consider doing something positive, not something that removes part of it. Try writing content instead of victimising the sport's project in a way that a neutral may think you have some moral opposition/hatred towards.... Thank you. Paralympiakos (talk) 19:46, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You rejecting it or not is really not the issue, MOS:FLAG is a wiki-wide style guideline, as the closer of the RfC has pointed out on their talk page RfC's are not votes. One of the reason why the MMA project on WP has such a bad reputation is through its perceived refusal to accept wiki-wide policies, rules and guidelines. Mtking ^(edits) 23:12, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

...Because guidelines aren't rules and are therefore practically irrelevant. I know it isn't a vote, but I saw that your side's arguments were not more compelling and relevant than my sides. The RFC is a request for comment, not ruling. There are no RULES saying that flags are banned. End of. Paralympiakos (talk) 23:24, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No point in debating this, you know of the RfC outcome and editing contra to that RfC is classed as disruptive editing and likely to attract consequences. Mtking ^(edits) 00:13, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Again, it is a comment, not a ruling, so in no way would that constitute disruptive editing. What DOES constitute disruptive editing is your decision to try to virtually eliminate this project from wiki. You do not exist to help the project, you seem to exist to destroy it and it's rather unfortunate that you dedicate so much time on removing stuff from the internet that there is no clear consensus for. You can quote whatever WP:WHATEVERNONSENSEYOUWANT, but I see these guidelines (guidelines, not rules) as a bit like the Bible.....there's always something elsewhere to contradict itself. Paralympiakos (talk) 06:33, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering what Tier you would put K-1 Heros into if it were added to the current list at WP:MMATIER? PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 08:02, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. My knowledge of that promotion is rather limited compared to most others, but from a brief glance, possibly worthy of a second tier addition. I think we need to add WSOF and IFL first and foremost. Paralympiakos (talk) 10:22, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My friend, please take a look here and reconsider the statement about them maybe being second tier. Then if you aren't convinced please look at Melvin's record and check some of those Heroes events. Maybe even this mmaweekly event review. Its a really good read

Maybe take a look at the 4 WFA events and see that they had top flight competition including Rich FRanklin, Machida, Antonio Mckee,Trigg, Marvin Eastman,Vitor Ribioero, Valetijn Overeem , Kimo, Joey Villasenor, Jeff Curran, Mike Van Arsdale, Razor Rob, Josh Thompson, Dennis Hallman, Lindland, Rampage, Ricco Rodriguez, Mayhem Miller, Bas Rutten, and MArtin Kampmann. Wow! I was actually surprised at maybe a fourth of those until I looked for myself just now. I think even tho they only had 4 events, with their high concentration of outstanding fighters they should be top tier.

Yeah the IFL was SICK. They gave fighters benefits and a monthly paycheck. Plus 4 minute rounds are more humane. I am proud to say I saw both Portland Events. Saw Lindland KO Horn! Anyways. There seems to be progress towards this discussion on the wikiproject talk space. Please chime in so we can move closer to getting a consensus together for (hopefully) a three tier system with the inclusion of the WSOF,IFL,WFA and Heros. PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 01:41, 4 January 2013 (UTC)PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 09:12, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

here. PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 21:27, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Marcus Vänttinen is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marcus Vänttinen until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. LlamaAl (talk) 03:23, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jacen Flynn is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jacen Flynn until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Mkdw^talk 00:27, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Mixed Martial Arts for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 21:55, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, [[ The Ultimate Fighter: Team Carwin vs. Team Nelson Finale ]], has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going [[ Talk:The Ultimate Fighter: Team Carwin vs. Team Nelson |here]], and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Dohertyben (talk) 00:58, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:World-series-of-fighting-1-poster.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Hasteur (talk) 15:54, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on File:James Wilks UFC 105.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:46, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:MMAWorldSeriesOfFightingLogo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:41, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:The Ultimate Fighter Logo.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Equivalent file media at Commons, this is simple text. Not an F8 as the Commons file and this one have different licenses.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:31, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I see you previously voted against the deletion of Antonio McKee's page. The page is one again unfairly nominated for deletion and I would appreciate another vote against the proposed deletion if you have any time at all. Thank you User talk:16derria — Preceding undated comment added 01:11, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Johnson (fighter) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Spinixster (chat!) 02:59, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]