Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/4th and 8

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 merge to 2013 Green Bay Packers season. If we're merging, the actual revisions have to stay somewhere... so anyone should feel fre eto find a better home for them than where they are now. Courcelles 06:16, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

4th and 8[edit]

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

Far to soon to decide whether this is a 'play' notable enough for its own article. Surely better merged to an article on the game, one of the teams, or whatever. TheLongTone (talk) 12:43, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And incidentally a rubbish article title.TheLongTone (talk) 12:44, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia can't make the claim that the article title is rubbish when there is an article title for 4th and 26. Argument isn't valid.Chriskellydev (talk) 16:35, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not claiming the article title is rubbish. This editor is saying that in their opinion it's rubbish. And the same goes for 4th and 26. Just not specific enough. In any case the article stands or falls by its own merits.TheLongTone (talk) 17:38, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete Pretty much textbook WP:TOOSOON. There is no way to determine, the day after a game, whether a particular play is going retain any sort of lasting notability. Mangoe (talk) 17:25, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:55, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:55, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:55, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:55, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

redirect to the article about the game in which it occurred and merge content there to. Dloh cierekim 00:13, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

thats a merge, I believe? happy with that.TheLongTone (talk) 00:46, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to 2013 Green Bay Packers season. As Mangoe said, it's really WP:TOOSOON to determine whether or not this play is going to have any sort of long-term effect or lasting notability. Ejgreen77 (talk) 04:13, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge is the correct action. I will add "without re-direct" to that. This clearly is one of many, many, many "fourth down and 8" plays in the history of football.--Paul McDonald (talk) 04:18, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge without redirect per Ejgreen. Too soon as noted above. 4th and 26 is a different story. It could be disambiguated if another 4th and 26 retains lasting notability. Royal broil 14:43, 31 December 2013 (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.