Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Goal Line Stand from Tigerland

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:41, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Goal Line Stand from Tigerland

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

This regular season game is not notable per WP:SPORTSEVENT. There at least a couple dozen games of similar stature every season in college football, often more than one over a given weekend. Although important in the 2016 SEC standings (and quite fun for Florida fans), it is unlikely to be nationally notable enough in the long-term for a stand-alone article.

I also don't like how earlier attempts to remove this article were quietly brushed aside. It was nominated for speedy deletion last week by User:RileyBugz, and since I agreed that it should be deleted, I copied (and tweaked) most of the text over to the appropriate section of Florida–LSU football rivalry. The speedy deletion was contested, so User:GorillaWarfare converted the nomination to a PROD, but the AfD banner was quickly and inappropriately removed by this anonymous IP. That's not how things are supposed to be handled.

As a life-long Gator fan, I will freely admit that I greatly enjoyed watching this football game. However, as a long-time Wikipedia editor, I know that one must put rooting interest aside in matters like this. As written, the text is often borderline WP:NPOV, with a questionable title and several opinionated statements that would require citation or removal if left in the article. I'm not going to bother fixing these problems, though, because according to clear notability guidelines, the article should be deleted altogether. ~ Zeng8r (talk) 20:38, 18 July 2017 (UTC) note I'd call for a merge with Florida–LSU football rivalry, but as I said above, I've already taken care of that. --Zeng8r (talk) 20:41, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as the meaningful content has been merged to the article regarding the rivalry. An article on this particular game can be spun back out of the rivalry article at a later date if it turns out it was the "start of something big" or anything like that. As a side-note, the removal of the PROD tag (the AfD template hasn't ever been removed after it was added) wasn't entirely out of process. Ideally, the IP would have removed it with some sort of rationale in the edit summary or with the addition of a bunch of extra sources to cement the article's existence, but that doesn't always happen. Best just to treat this as a "contested PROD" and nominate it here as has been done. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 23:17, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

reply My bad, I thought that the IP had removed an AfD banner. Still, I didn't like how an anonymous user deleted the banner without mentioning the removal in the edit summary, much less starting a discussion. Zeng8r (talk) 23:39, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's never a great look, I agree. In the long run, I'd say there's an argument for allowing participation in the deletion process, broadly defined (contesting CSDs, removing PRODs, opining here) to be restricted to logged-in users, although I don't know how enforceable that would be. I usually take the view that the IP removing the tag is most likely a/the contributor to the article and just forgot to log in, since the net result is the same. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 05:00, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. WikiVirusC^(talk) 23:25, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. WikiVirusC^(talk) 23:25, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. WikiVirusC^(talk) 23:25, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions. WikiVirusC^(talk) 23:25, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Filled with original research, including the very name of the article. Lizard (talk) 07:12, 25 July 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.