Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/150th Anniversary Heritage Match


 * 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 redirect‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ to England–Scotland football rivalry. Liz Read! Talk! 06:50, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

150th Anniversary Heritage Match

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

WP:N. This is just a routine friendly match between two national teams, which happens to mark an anniversary. No evidence of significance or coverage beyond what would be expected for any other game between these teams. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 08:07, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and United Kingdom. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 08:07, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Wait the match is tomorrow, we should have waited at least until the match occurs to see whether it's notable or not. I don't think it will be- the 150th anniversary doesn't inherently make the match notable, and sources seem to be mostly just talking about the 150 number, which could be mentioned in one or two lines in articles about the history of both teams. That being said, nominating this 1 day before the event seems disingenuous to me. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:15, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:03, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - whilst arguably it is WP:TOOSOON I think there's a snowball's chance in hell of trying to stop this page being created. If there are not many media outlets writing about the match today, there surely will be tomorrow. JMWt (talk) 11:06, 11 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Wait until the day after the match. If media outlets only produced match reports as if the match is a standard friendly then deletion is best. But if significant coverage of the match is provided with reference to it being an anniversary then I would say it should be kept. Whist I agree that an anniversary isn't inherently notable, the 150th Anniversary of international football does seem more of a significant one.
 * Mn1548 (talk) 14:30, 11 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep - Per JMWt. Defineilty going to get media. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 17:11, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
 * "Definitely going to get media" is WP:SPECULATION. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:07, 12 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Wait see how it does in the first place once the match is done but itll prob be seen as notableMuur (talk) 07:47, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment I am bemused by this nomination, Did you not consider waiting till after the event to see the full outcome of the match and response? Why nominate before the outcome and respond? Govvy (talk) 12:46, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Because there's no reason to expect anything beyond routine match reports and coverage. WP:NOTNEWS. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 12:48, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Leading up to the game, (BBC Sport) England v Scotland: Football's oldest international fixture in numbers, (Sky Sports) Scotland vs England: Old rivals meet ahead of era-defining European Championships in Germany, this is not routine coverage. :/ Govvy (talk) 14:18, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Which all relate to the rivalry in general, rather than this specific match. We already have an article for that. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 14:31, 12 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Post match discussion
 * Merge/redirect to England–Scotland football rivalry, no need for a separate article. GiantSnowman 12:04, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

So the match was played, the fans booed each other's anthems, Harry Maguire scored an own goal, and England won. Water is wet. WP:SPORTSEVENT, in particular "For a game or series that is already covered as a subtopic in another article, consider developing the topic in the existing article first until it becomes clear that a standalone article is warranted". Jmorrison230582 (talk) 06:29, 14 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Merge/redirect to England–Scotland football rivalry, game didn't generate anyway near as much notability in relation to "150 years of international football" as I was anticipating when creating this article. Don't think it warrants it's own page. Mn1548 (talk) 14:58, 14 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete- Nothing pre or post match is outwith WP:ROUTINE for a football match. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 19:07, 14 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Redirect only I completely disagree on any merge to England–Scotland football rivalry of content, however I agree with on the redirect as a possible search term. There is a paragraph already there with the subheading of September 2023 friendly that needs retitling to 150th Anniversary Heritage Match and the prose could be expanded on the article there, but a complete merge is simply out of the question, pinging  over that also. Govvy (talk) 21:19, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, obviously a complete merge is a no, but certain prose content should be kept somewhere on Wikipedia. Mn1548 (talk) 21:22, 14 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete Not much of extreme significance happened in this match. KingSkyLord (talk &#124; contribs) 23:17, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Redirect to England–Scotland football rivalry. The coverage of this match has been WP:ROUTINE or about the rivalry in general. As such, there's no need for a separate article, and it's already covered in a few lines at the rivalry article (which is more useful game summary than this article has anyway). Joseph2302 (talk) 07:50, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. This was a friendly match with a fancy title. No indication of significant coverage. Mattythewhite (talk) 12:43, 16 September 2023 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.</b> 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.