Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1987 Fiesta Bowl Play-By-Play


 * 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. Wikipedia may not be paper, but it is not an indiscriminate collection of information either. This is absolutely not what Wikipedia is for. There's also nothing to merge. --Core desat  07:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

1987 Fiesta Bowl Play-By-Play

 * - (View AfD) (View log)

Wikipedia is WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information. This information could possibly be ok on a football blog or wiki but not a general knowledge one. WoohookittyWoohoo! 10:58, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. I don't think this has a place in Wikipedia as it stands today.--Wehwalt 12:13, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, possible speedy delete as devoid of context. To anyone other than a fan of American football this reads as so much gibberish....ChrisTheDude 13:27, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, not an article. Terence Ong 13:51, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete this is actually understandable as the football summary of each and every play. However, there is scant encyclopedic value in rote recitation of the detailed play-by-play of even an extremely crucial game such as this.-- danntm T C 16:48, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * This is actually not "understandable", I haven't got the faintest idea what "Penalty on PSU, False Start, 5 yards, enforced at PSU 44." means, for example.... ChrisTheDude 08:06, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a place for play by play. (YechielMan) 129.98.212.69 18:37, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete As stated before, gibberish to anyone other than a fan of American football. Mcr616 00:30, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Penalty on the play delete - I'm sure this was copied from somewhere else to begin with, anyway... TheRealFennShysa 16:39, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge any useful information and Redirect to 1987 Fiesta Bowl, where an abbreviated version of this infomation should exist. VegaDark 05:28, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge useful information (IF ANY) with 1987 Fiesta Bowl, then redirect per VegaDark. Any transferred information needs to be writen for people other than college football fans.--Tlmclain  | Talk 05:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete I don't see any useful information. Delete. NMajdan &bull;talk 05:44, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep (and wikify) or Merge/Redirect WP:NOT paper, and this is not indiscriminate: The play-by-play of an important CFB game is not random, it's very selective. My only concern with merging is it might make the 1987 Fiesta Bowl article too long. Further, this type of information, if sourced, is valuable as it could contain links of players involved. If cleaned up and put into a template system (to be developed, but on my/WP:CFB to-do list (not official)) it could be well presented and organized and perhaps merged onto the 1987 Fiesta Bowl article. -- MECU ≈ talk 13:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep (Cleanup and wikify) per WP:NOT paper. This is not indiscriminate information.  It is detailed information that is part of a bigger picture.  1987 Fiesta Bowl is written in summary style and refers to this article for more detailed information.  If properly re-written, all the terminology can be explained/linked to appropriate articles as necessar and the player names can be wikilinked to their articles.  Johntex\talk 14:13, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Response to the keep voters. I don't think there's a single other football article with play by play like this. If we keep this, we may as well create play by play for every Super Bowl and every other championship game that's ever been played.  A summary of major events (mostly, the scoring) is entirely appropriate.  A play by play with excruciating detail should be left off Wikipedia, and linked as an external link if one is available.  I emphasize again, ask yourself, do you want every single football article to look like this?  I don't.  (YechielMan) 129.98.212.72 02:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * (I request YechielMan sign his/her post while logged in please.) Yes, I do think every game worthy of an article should have play by play as a part (or sub-part, listed on another page) of that article. For completeness of the subject (See WP:FA requirements, Featured article criteria, specifically 1b) and as well as being a resource and complete encyclopedia. I do agree this needs cleanup, and this could be the precedent of whether the information should be on the main page or a "sub" page like this is acceptable. I think this AFD came before the system (ie, a template system and rules on how it should be done) is ready to handle the article in a proper manner. The information can be referenced and is valid information that contributes to the subject. I would content that a game that doesn't have a play by play couldn't even be considered a good article, but that may be extreme, since Fifth Down made it without it, but it likely couldn't make it to A or FA without it. The drive play-by-play that leads up to the fifth down would be critical for exhaustive completeness. The entire play by play would be important for a reader to get the flow of the game and understand how the scoring and position put the team in the situations they had. Is there a game article that's a FA? As far as I know, Fifth Down is the first (CFB) game article to make at least GA. I'm not aware of NFL games really though. -- MECU ≈ talk 03:36, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Response to (YechielMan) 129.98.212.72  - the answer is "Yes". In an ideal world, any game which we cover with its own article would be written in summary style and would include links to other articles with a high level of detail.  That could include pages like this play-by-play summary, rosters, photo-galleries on commons, etc.  There is no harm to this level of detail.  It is completely within policy.  What needs to happen is it needs to be wikified and cleaned-up.  If the article survives AfD, I will volunteer to clean it up. Johntex\talk 05:47, 19 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete Aside from scoring drives (already detailed on the main 1987 Fiesta Bowl article, the rest of this information is hardly encyclopedic. Any summary information not already on the main article should be merged. Without checking, I would wager that this play-by-play exists online somewhere else and can be linked under External links as an added reference for CFB enthusiasts who may desire this kind of information. -- PSUMark2006   talk  |  contribs  04:39, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Information I'll let the consensus decide. Kermitmorningstar 13:41, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep not indiscriminate in any way shape or form and far more notable than, oh, 95 percent of the comic book and video game articles on Wikipedia. ShivaDaDestroyer 02:46, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 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.