Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Braves–Mets 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   keep. Courcelles 23:22, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Braves–Mets rivalry

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The following deletion proposal was submitted to deletion review, where contributors decided to list it here as a new AfD. See previous discussion at Articles for deletion/Braves-Mets rivalry (2nd nomination).  Sandstein  08:28, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

I think this page should be deleted. Most of the page is a reference to the Yankees and IMO there aren't enough reliable sources to support the questionable notability of this page to exist. Arnabdas (talk) 20:22, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 09:50, 20 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep Very well sourced article. Kinston eagle (talk) 00:19, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
 * How is this well sourced beyond the 5 year period? Arnabdas (talk) 14:01, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * So you agree it is well sourced for a 5 year period? What policy or guideline is this 5 year rule based on?  Rlendog (talk) 19:33, 27 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. Unlike the other rivalries up for afd, this one seems fairly well documented. Spanneraol (talk) 16:04, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
 * How can you really say that? The only documentation of the rivalry is within the late 90's. Arnabdas (talk) 14:00, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * "The only documentation of the rivalry is within the late 90s." Even if that is true (and there are certainly sources available at least for 1969 as well, and almost certainly for the early naughts), it is still well and more than adequately sourced. Rlendog (talk) 19:32, 27 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - Frankly I don't like these kinds of articles, but that's not a valid delete reason, so I'm not using it. The aritcle appears to be well-sourced, if poorly written and organized, but again those aren't valid dleete reasons. I do think this type of content would be better covered on the main articles, seaso articloes, and playoff articles, but that's a reason for merging. - BilCat (talk) 06:06, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Again, how is this well sourced? Sure there are multiple sources for a brief 5 year period, but a 5 year period doesn't warrant a rivalry article on wikipedia. Arnabdas (talk) 14:00, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Per what guideline or policy? Rlendog (talk) 19:32, 27 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep This article needs a good deal of work, especially to de-Yankee it, but it meets notability guidelines. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:39, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
 * What notability guidelines are you talking about? Has this rivalry stood the test of time? No. Have there been numerous sources documenting the rivalry since the inception of the Mets? No. Aside from the late 90's, there isn't any reason to even consider the two teams a rivalry. The Reds-Cardinals and the Orioles-Yankees are bigger rivals who have stood the test of time longer than the Mets-Braves. Arnabdas (talk) 14:00, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Reds-Cardinals didn't have nearly the level of sourcing as this. Orioles-Yankees, as I recall, was deleted very easily because there was one source total. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:14, 27 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - Adequate sourcing to establish notability. Rlendog (talk) 00:07, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Adequate sourcing for a 5 year period, but not beyond that. A 5 year rivalry does not establish notability. Arnabdas (talk) 14:00, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * There is adequate sourcing over that period to establish notability. This "5 year rivalty" objection has no basis in policy. Rlendog (talk) 19:30, 27 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete This article does not meet notability guidelines. We decided to delete the Reds-Cardinals rivalry page for that very reason. There were not enough notable sources depicting that rivalry just like there aren't enough now. This rivalry was strong in the late 90's and really no other time besides then. It smacks of tunnel vision and is a complete joke of a write up. I ask the editors here to show me how this article meets notability criteria over the Reds-Cardinals and list all the reliable sourcing that talks of the rivalry OUTSIDE of the late 90's matchups. I hate deleting articles, but fair is fair and despite my own numerous attempts find reliable sourcing to reference the rivalry and expand this article, there simply have not been enough...and definitely not as historic as the Reds-Cardinals. Arnabdas (talk) 13:55, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Of course you vote !strong delete, you're the person who brought this nomination. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:14, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Any Red-Cardinals rivalry is older than Mets=Braves, but unfortunately, despite several editors' (including myself) best efforts, virtually no sources could be found to support it. This one has plenty of available sources. Rlendog (talk) 19:35, 27 August 2011 (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.