CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Dan Hardy

English mixed martial arts fighter and combat sport commentator

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 12, 2026
Entity authoritySource title only
Source-derived summary

Daniel Mark Hardy is an English former mixed martial artist who fought in the welterweight division. During his professional MMA career, which began in 2004, Hardy fought in multiple promotions, such as Cage Force and Cage Warriors, before signing a contract with the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) in 2008. In 2010, he fought Georges St-Pierre for the UFC Welterweight Championship, but lost the bout via decision.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Dan Hardy” is english mixed martial arts fighter and combat sport commentator. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Hardy, English and mixed, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA concise reference frame for defining the subject, testing terminology and identifying the institution closest to the evidence. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2004, 2008, 2010—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Hardy, English and mixed is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “english mixed martial arts fighter and combat sport commentator” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 12, 2026. The first chronological checks are 2004, 2008 and 2010.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Dan Hardy”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Dan Hardy primary sources, Dan Hardy archive and Hardy research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Dan Hardy”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Dan Hardy” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.