Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fresno State–Hawaii football rivalry

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 keep. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:41, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fresno State–Hawaii football rivalry[edit]

Fresno State–Hawaii football rivalry (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)

WP:NRIVALRY says "Sports rivalries are not inherently notable" and defers to WP:GNG. GNG states "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." Rivalry is not establish via the current (lone) citation. There is some routine coverage in some search results showing slight, but not significant (or national), coverage. UW Dawgs (talk) 09:52, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 11:23, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 11:23, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hawaii-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 11:23, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is not so easy.  The Fresno Bee is a nationally recognized newspaper, and [1] this statement explains that Hawaii has played Fresno State more than any other team.  The article itself is nothing more than a Wikipedia blog.  I'm going to !vote Delete, as if there is no one willing to take on the large job of adding inline citations, this should not be on Wikipedia.  Unscintillating (talk) 22:01, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Unscintillating: The fact that the article can be improved, including adding inline citations, is not a valid reason for deletion except in the case of a biography of a living person (which this is not). The issue here is whether this rivalry is notable, and the extensive coverage dating back to the 1950s shows that it is. Cbl62 (talk) 12:28, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I could go into a thoughtful policy based rebuttal with quotes and an IAR with reasons added to cover gray areas, but with no one working on this article, I wonder if the ARS has editors interested.  Unscintillating (talk) 01:47, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Unscintillating (talk) 01:47, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:35, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:35, 9 December 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.