Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/4th and 26


 * 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 of the debate was keep. Sjakkalle (Check!)  11:07, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

4th and 26
I didn't prod this because I think it's borderline, but I don't see this as a play worthy of its own article. It was a difficult play to convert, sure, but was it notable? Not really. Aplomado talk 02:01, 16 May 2006 (UTC) Nomination withdrawn per Jjjsixsix, I guess we can give this article some time. Aplomado talk 05:09, 16 May 2006 (UTC) Addendum: I should not have retracted the nomination. This debate should be played out regardless of the outcome. Aplomado talk 18:42, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak delete I simply can't decide on this one. On the one hand, it was a huge play that was analyzed over and over and over and over again. On the other hand, it was just one 4th down play, and one that, in the long run, was unimportant- the Eagles still lost in the conference championship game. This isn't to say that other huge plays haven't come from teams that didn't win the Super Bowl, but those plays were things like the Music City Miracle or the Miracle at the Meadowlands- absolutely spectacular, you-will-never-see-this-again plays. A 4th-and-26 play does not fall into that category. So, tough as it is, I'm voting for delete. Barely. -- Kicking222 02:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Plenty of notable single plays are already included (The Catch, The Fumble, etc.).  The fact that the Eagles did in fact sell shirts making reference to the play also helps. --Cheapestcostavoider 03:50, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I think comparing this play to either the Catch or the Fumble is a huuuuge stretch. Aplomado  talk 04:08, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't. Kicking says it doesn't matter because the Eagles still lost, but then the Broncos still lost the Super Bowl after the Catch and the Fumble, and the Titans still lost the Super Bowl after the Music City Miracle.  If the Eagles don't make a play which required them to get a quarter of the field's worth of yardage, they lose.  Simple as that.  That at least ranks with the Tuck Rule as a play worthy of Keeping.  -- Grev 04:12, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: For whatever it's worth at this point, it's certainly up there with the River City Relay, and not only was that not a playoff game, but the Saints didn't even win. --Cheapestcostavoider 18:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * You rank this play up there with "The Catch"? Seriously?? Still I suppose I can buy keeping the article in that it was notable for Eagles fans, at least for now. Aplomado  talk 04:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It's too recent for comparisons, quite honestly. It is, however, in football folklore now, kind of like the tuck... we just need to see if it stays in there over an extended period of time. -- Jjjsixsix (t)/(c) @ 04:50, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and relist in a few years (yes, years). -- Jjjsixsix (t)/(c) @ 04:50, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep we seems to have a few of these single play articles (Hand of God goal f.x.), I agree with Jjjsixsix let relist in a couple of years and see if anybody remembers the play then. -- E ivindt@c 05:48, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I've come to agree that there is some claim to notability here, but for the record I think that some of you don't fully understand the significance of plays like the "Hand of God," a very famous, oft-replayed and controversial goal. A similar claim can be made about the "Immaculate Reception." The Catch and the Fumble, likewise, have their place etched in sports lore. There's Doug Flutie's Hail Mary, a last second 50-yard prayer that is miraculously caught and wins the game. There's The Play, a game won between two heated rivals based on a kickoff return featuring five laterals. This, on the other hand, is simply a long fourth down conversion in a non-championship, conference or otherwise, playoff game. It was impressive and probably notable as it relates to Eagles fans, but I don't think it's at all accurate to compare it to these other plays. Aplomado  talk 06:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Well worded article about important event in Green Bay Packer history. If innumerable anime characters get articles, this decisive play should have one, too.  --BaronLarf 05:55, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - non-notable, of interest to fans of the team only. I vote to delete the anime characters, too, whenever I get the chance. Vizjim 09:09, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * weak Keep, I would delete as above but I think anime characters are a lost cause. My main quam with this is that it's poorly written and unclear. Some pictures and copyeditting would really help it but I think it's notable enough. Olleicua 17:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. There is no way this can be compared to the Hand of God, which changed the outcome of a world competition and led to significant international tension. This play is not widely known outside fans of a single sports team. Therefore, it is not encyclopedic material. &mdash; Haeleth Talk 18:28, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: If it is kept, would someone please add some references or citations of sources? It has been tagged with since February.  Zzyzx11 (Talk) 18:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Several football plays that only have significance to one or two teams have their own articles on Wikipedia (Red Right 88, The Play, Music City Miracle, The Miracle at the Meadowlands, etc). Kirjtc2 19:49, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The Play has significance only to Cal or Stanford fans? I think you are mistaken. Aplomado  talk 19:58, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Tell me how it would affect an Ohio State fan. And even if it does have a more wide-reaching effect than the others, explain what significance Red Right 88 has outside of Cleveland, 25 years after the fact, or the Miracle at the Meadowlands (a regular season game, no less) has outside Philly or New York (the Eagles lost their first playoff game while the Giants didn't make it at all).Kirjtc2 20:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The question is not whether it affects an Ohio State fan, the question is if it's a notable play outside of a small group of fans. The Play is arguably the most famous play in college football history. Aplomado  talk 23:07, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, but what about Red Right 88, which was not only a single play, but one that didn't even work, for a team that lost the game? --Cheapestcostavoider 01:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I'd say that was significant to the team's history. It's possible I've misunderstood the level of significance of "4th and 26" to Eagles fans, so I'm not against keeping this article now. Aplomado  talk 21:49, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Rename because the title is unhelpful. Peter Grey 21:42, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep since the shirts kind of add notability, although as a Packers fan I didn't really remember this until I read the article. BryanG 21:57, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Week keap, but I wouldn't oppose a merge into NFL playoffs, 2003-04 or perhaps the Packers or the Eagles articles. Cool3 20:46, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. This really should be covered in the game or team article and not as its own article.  Vegaswikian 23:38, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and/or rename, as it was a significant play in its own right on grounds that a "4th and 26" was a rarity in Gridiron football. User:24.271.143.256 03:56, 19 May 2006 (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.