Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alabama-Notre Dame football rivalry


 * 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. ✗ plicit  15:00, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Alabama-Notre Dame football rivalry

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

This appears to be a WP:ESSAY albeit with references. But it is a play by play match report, not an encyclopaedia article. As written it is, surely, out of scope. 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:00, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. 🇺🇦  Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:00, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Alabama and Indiana.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:04, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment the text is almost verbatim from 2012_Alabama_Crimson_Tide_football_team. I don't see the relevant attribution as far as copying within Wikipedia. Without that, there really is no article. and I say this as an extremely biased Notre Dame fan, there is no rivalry Star   Mississippi  14:31, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment. On the one hand, much of this content is a report on a single game. On the other hand, when there is a Wikipedia article about a sports rivalry, I usually vote to delete unless there are sources that specifically indicate that there is a rivalry between the two teams (as opposed to two teams that play each other from time to time but don't have a true "rivalry"). And there are a few sources like that: Yahoo! Sports, AL.com, The Daily Beast, OregonLive (which is cited in this article). I'm discounting Tourisme83.com and The Western Journal which are cited in the article, because the first is a French tourism website publishing a post irrelevant to its own subject matter and the second is considered generally unreliable, but the existence of some valid sources suggests that a proper article could possibly be created. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 19:10, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete there is very little WP:SIGCOV establishing Alabama and Notre Dame as "rivals" Going through the list provided by User:Metropolitan90, the Oregonian and Daily Beast pages do not describe the teams as "rivals" at all in the body of the article, only in the title.  Many times publications will use buzzwords like "rivalry" to manufacture hype and get clicks, but these two simply do nothing to establish the two programs as rivals. The Yahoo! sports page actually calls the Alabama-Notre Dame series a "non-rivalry," the AL.com page simply talks about the series and doesn't establish the two sides as "rivals" (using the term "rivalry" only once in passing). Notre Dame and Alabama are obviously two of the top programs in college football history, but that along with a few high-profile games is not enough to establish a rivalry, as evidenced by the lack of significant coverage.  Frank   Anchor  02:38, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
 * @Frank Anchor Does this mean the article is a WP:HOAX, or simply a well intentioned probable error of judgement? I have no opinion either way. My nomination is based on article content without any knowledge of the topic covered. 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 08:10, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I have no reason to believe the article wasn’t created in good faith, it’s just not a notable subject.  Frank   Anchor  11:08, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Agree with @Frank Anchor here @Timtrent. Likely a case of "rivalry headlines" = worthy of an article on the rivalry. I don't know the editor but assume all good faith and human error w/r/t not attributing. Star   Mississippi  15:09, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Grateful to Frank Anchor and Star Mississippi. It's always well to clear things up. 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:41, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete: They've met twice since 1987 and the next time they'll meet is 2029, this isn't an established and "true" rivalry. Coverage will exist, but it's rather routine given how much coverage is given to every individual game of top football programs. I'm with Frank Anchor on this one, rivalry headlines are often misleading. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:04, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep (but maybe rename "Alabama-Notre Dame football series"). These discussions typically get bogged down into whether a series qualifies as a "rivalry". That's fair since the article is titled "Alabama-Notre Dame football rivalry". If we take a step back from the "rivalry" paradigm, the series between the two greatest programs in the history of college football is notable, regardless of whether it's a "rivalry". These teams have played each other nine times, with both of them ranked in eight of those games, the 1973 and 2013 games deciding the national championship, the 1975 game depriving Alabama of a national championship, and the 2021 game as the national championship semifinal. That is at least as notable as Alabama–Penn State football rivalry which has been kept twice in AfDs in 2011 and again in 2018. Cbl62 (talk) 18:18, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree with the others that 8 games played between the two teams (the 9th will be in 2029) does not make a rivalry. The difference between this and the Alabama-Penn State rivalry that Cbl62 mentions is that Alabama played Penn State every year in the 1980s. Alabama and Notre Dame have played each other sporadically, which does not qualify as a rivalry for me. The sources cited above or in the article only loosely mention the "rivalry" aspect of these teams and were primarily written before the 2013 and 2021 bowl games played between the two of them, perhaps to hype up them up. Natg 19 (talk) 18:32, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
 * delete but the only reason I can come up with is ignore all rules because I really believe that the editing of any valuable content into other articles would be better rather than having this stand-alone article right now. I disagree that "we" are the ones who determine if it is a rivalry, but we ARE the ones who weigh on on the notability of that rivalry.  I lean toward an editing solution.--Paul McDonald (talk) 22:12, 20 December 2022 (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.