Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Astros's combined World Series no-hitter


 * 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. As noted by Hatman31, the relevant guideline here is WP:NSPORTSEVENT, which says, "...news coverage should be extensive (e.g., outside of the week of its occurrence and in non-local newspapers)." The sources provided by Red-tailed hawk are all from the night or day after the game was played, and as Muboshgu refuted, basically the same as routine coverage for any World Series game.

It is entirely possible this is an extraordinary game, and sources will appear in the future to justify that, but it has not been argued that they exist today.

Finally, I was initially going to close this as redirect, but enough people have complained about the current title that it doesn't make sense to create a redirect at a title people don't like. Legoktm (talk) 20:32, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Astros's combined World Series no-hitter

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

Proposed deletion objected to. This is an unnecessary WP:CONTENTFORK created in the WP:RECENTISM of the event. Everything in this article is already stated at 2022 World Series, therefore this doesn't meet WP:NEVENT independent of the 2022 World Series. Yes, there are many sources about Game 4 of the 2022 World Series, but there are many sources about every World Series game, and none get individual pages, aside from Larsen's perfect game and the Shot Heard 'Round the World, which are notable exceptions. Roy Halladay's postseason no-hitter does not have a standalone article. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:14, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Baseball and United States of America. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:14, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I really don't have an issue either way, but if I was leaning either way, I go with deleting it and merging it in the Game 4 section of the World Series page. posty (talk) 16:45, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Delete - Clearly no need for a separate article; the relevant guideline is WP:SPORTSEVENT. I say delete rather than merge this because it seems like most if not all of its content is already in the article on the WS. Hatman31 (talk) 23:59, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you,, I forgot about WP:SPORTSEVENT. That applies here. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:20, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Keep It may not be quite as notable as Don Larsen's perfect game, Bill Mazeroski's 1960 World Series home run, Kirk Gibson's 1988 World Series home run or Joe Carter's 1993 World Series home run, but the 2nd no-hitter in World Series is still very notable. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 04:28, 4 November 2022 (UTC) Keep: It's not a perfect game, but the only other no-hitter in World Series history and the first one in 56 years, I believe is pretty notable. MushroomMan674 (talk) 09:27, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep: A clearly notable event (no-hitters in the World Series are far from a common event) that has received far more than the routine coverage of a regular World Series game.Esolo5002 (talk) 04:16, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Keep: Pitcher feats in the World Series are grossly underrepresented on wikipedia as a whole. We have multiple pages for individual World Series home runs, but essentially nothing other than Don Larsen's perfect game (which would've been made regardless of when it was done given its status as a perfect game). Blaylockjam10 said it probably isn't as notable as the individual home runs, but I actually disagree. The pitching staff for the Houston Astros did something that has only ever happened one other time in the World Series. I'd also throw out that Roy Halladay's postseason no-hitter not having a standalone article isn't the best comparison. It was extremely early in the postseason, they weren't playing for the championship in that series, his no-hitter did not have the same stakes behind it. Even so, it not having its own page, to me, is problematic as well. If anything this and Roy Halladay's no-hitter should both have their own articles. Korijenkins (talk) 17:13, 4 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Comment Nowhere in these comments by Blaylockjam, MushroomMan, or Korijenkins is any mention of Wikipedia policy, just fandom. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:19, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Relisting comment: for some policy based input. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star   Mississippi  14:47, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:COVERAGE. There is in-depth coverage of this event by a diverse set of independent reliable sources that are published across the globe. These sources include Washington Post, BBC News, Fox News, Associated Press, The New York Times (1, 2), The Wall Street Journal, The Guardian, CNN, Los Angeles Times, AFP, La Razón, El Universal, etc. The only criterion of WP:COVERAGE that can't quite be measured at this point is duration of coverage, but the coverage of the no-hitter doesn't appear to have stopped and I think it more likely than not that the coverage will stretch beyond a short news cycle. As such, I see no reason to delete this under WP:NEVENT; it's being covered by major publications in multiple countries and it's being covered in-depth. Additionally, while  is correct in that none of them explicitly say the words "NEVENT", the arguments of, , and  have a basis in that guideline's criteria of WP:EVENTCRIT. A no-hitter in the World Series is, to be frank, so exceptionally rare in baseball that it is only happened twice (the last time being over 65 years ago); this is nowhere near a WP:ROUTINE sort of event. Moreover, WP:NEVENT explicitly notes that The topic of an article should be notable, or "worthy of notice"; that is, "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded"; the arguments of those three specifically address the claim that the article's topic is unusual, significant, and interesting enough to be recorded in our encyclopedia and are thereby based in WP:PAG. —  Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 19:21, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * The same depth of coverage exists for Game 5, and nobody is making a stand-alone article for it. Washington Post, BBC, NYT, Fox News (1, 2), Wall Street Journal, The Guardian, CNN, Los Angeles Times, La Razon, El Universal. Granted, I can't find AFP in a quick search. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:37, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I found AFP. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:48, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Game 5 probably isn't "unusual enough to deserve attention." There have been hundreds of 1 run wins and great catches in World Series history, there have only been 2 no-hitters. There's nothing exceptional or out of the ordinary regarding the other games in this World Series, but this isn't the case for game 4. Korijenkins (talk) 03:17, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep — extremely rare, notable event (although it could be renamed; “Houston Astros combined World Series no-hitter” would avoid the awkward “s’s” in the title). Not every World Series game is notable, not every no-hitter is notable, but a World Series no-hitter is definitely notable. White 720 (talk) 00:30, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect instead to 2022 World Series, where the information is found here on the Game 4, no need for a standalone one. --2600:1700:9BF3:220:C175:BF52:A18C:EB22 (talk) 19:48, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment I have no problem with this on the grounds of notability; it is after all a rare, high-level achievement. But the content that is currently there doesn't seem to add much to what is already in the 2022 World Series article. What more is there to say that can justify a separate article? --Jameboy (talk) 22:18, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep very rare event and very well sourced making it a clear pass of WP:GNG. I agree with other users that the title of the article should be changed, but that is not the scope of this discussion.  Frank   Anchor  18:57, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Comments assuming this is kept, the article title is not grammatically correct. It should be Astros' combined World Series no-hitter -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:49, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep, but Astros's?!? The Grammar Police have issued an APB for second-degree murder of the English language. Clarityfiend (talk) 12:54, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NSPORTSEVENT. OliveYouBean (talk) 10:12, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per Red-tailed hawk and move to Houston Astros' combined World Series no-hitter per White 720 and ChrisTheDude. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (c/t) 21:26, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per mentions listed above — pitching achievements are highly underrepresented on Wikipedia. I also believe the article needs a better name. My vote is for “Houston Astros combined World Series no-hitter”. Sewageboy (talk) 08:37, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect Though a cool achievement, as covered by Muboshgu, it has received similar coverage as the other WS games in the series and can be redirected back to the main WS article. Although possibly unfair, combined no-hitters don't stick in the collective memory as well as a no-hitter by a single pitcher. Natg 19 (talk) 18:45, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. Recentism, systemic bias in favour of US topics, and not specifically notable itself. Optionally redirect to 2022 World Series. Stifle (talk) 11:09, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
 * If kept, move per GhostOfDanGurney. Stifle (talk) 09:20, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to 2022 World Series Theres a bit of independent content, but not much, hence the article should be merged for unique information, and redirected. While this is a significant achievement, the media hasn’t picked up on this any different from any other World Series game, sadly.--108.170.68.186 (talk) 20:32, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep References support that WP:NEVENT is met. MrsSnoozyTurtle 07:49, 18 November 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.