Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Secretaries Cup

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:32, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Secretaries Cup[edit]

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

Almost completely unsourced since 2007, no evidence of notability. PRODed, unPRODed, two passing mentions added. I'm willing to be convinced, but I can't find anything demonstrating the notability of the event itself. David Gerard (talk) 20:59, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 21:00, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 21:01, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

leaning keep It's mostly a question of how much mention you need away from the two schools' websites. I find NCAA, Military Times, and Newsday Ghits, which I think are sufficient indications of notability. Using the school websites to source the results is perfectly reasonable. Mangoe (talk) 22:21, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is a well-known small college rivalry, given extra import and notoriety because the two schools involved are federally funded service academies. A 2011 article in The Day entitled "Nothing rivals CGA-Kings Point football matchup" describes the rivalry in some detail [1]; here's an example of coverage in Sports Illustrated [2]. --Arxiloxos (talk) 23:11, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Those are not bad actually :-) Can you add those, and can we get something for that huge table of results? - David Gerard (talk) 00:01, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Highly notable small college rivalry, numerous sources mention it as discussed above. Those should be added into the article, but AFD is not cleanup so that's not a reason for deletion. Smartyllama (talk) 13:52, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Added some citations re game results. UW Dawgs (talk) 22:46, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a WP:GNG pass, per Arxiloxos' sources, which have now been added to the article. Ejgreen77 (talk) 10:54, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I believe it has been more than sufficiently shown that the article passes notability standards.--Paul McDonald (talk)
Keep. The Sports Illustrated article was the tipping point. That proves to me that GNG has been met. —C.Fred (talk) 17:02, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. 90% of the time I would say "delete" for an individual rivalry between two college sports teams, but this one really does seem to have attracted enough coverage to be regarded as notable. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:37, 26 August 2016 (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.