Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Citrus Series


 * 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   no consensus. Drmies (talk) 20:00, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Citrus Series

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Non-notable "rivalry". Two sources are team histories, while the other two explicitly challenge the idea that this is a rivalry. Other coverage appears to be WP:Run-of-the-mill game reports using "Citrus Series" in a colloquial way. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:27, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:28, 8 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete as WP:OR. The Miami media doesn't mention this as a notable rivalry. I remembered prodding and even speedy deleting this article a while back but I guess it got recreated. Secret account 02:46, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep just because it's not on the level with the Dodgers-Giants or Yankees-Red Sox doesn't make the rivalry non-notable, and between fans there's some bad blood (yes that's OR and can't be used as a source but it's true). Using the "Google Test" I get 59,900 results. I'm sure if you looked good enough through those results you could find sufficient sources to establish notability, in fact I will start work on it myself. (Full disclosure, in case it wasn't obvious enough, I am a Rays fan so I do have "inside" experience with the rivalry in question.)  CRRays Head90  | Get Some! 05:54, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Well a large percentage of those hits have nothing to do with this rivalry, the ones that does aren't reliable sources at all like Bleacher Report and other fan blogs. There's some passing mentions of a rivalry in Google News, but nothing that mentions why the rivalry is a notable one in particular, very few hits in the Miami and Tampa media. Secret account 22:21, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I've never understood, what's the big thing against fan blogs? Most I've seen give pretty reliable info.  CRRays Head90  | Get Some! 02:15, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Well fan blogs are usually written by fans not notable journalists. I've contributed some content before to Bleacher Report regarding baseball history, and I know several top contributors there and they aren't journalists. Blogs like that aren't considered reliable sources because the content isn't scrutinized, and it's written mainly for entertainment, literally a tabloid. I'm not saying all sports blogs are not considered reliable sources, as some are excellent sources written by well known journalists and players just not this one or the others mentioned in the Google search. Secret account 15:52, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:05, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, → TheSpecialUser TalkContributions* 07:53, 22 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect to Major League Baseball rivalries. I do not see enough independent sources of significant coverage to have a standalone article per WP:GNG.  However, this term is used so frequently that it is a natural search item.  I am always surprised when more attempts are not made to WP:PRESERVE information in lieu of an AfD.  It is OK to present reliable sources that say this "rivalry" is not really a rivalry, but there is no denying the concept of a Citrus Series exists. No prejudice for a standalone article if warranted by future sources.—Bagumba (talk) 16:32, 23 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. HighBeam Research has 25 results on <"citrus series" marlins> which boil down to about a dozen independent game reports spanning 1999 to 2011, mostly from AP Online. None of them appears to discuss the concept of the series in depth, though they are more than trivial mentions. Since HighBeam doesn't archive everything, other sources will undoubtedly exist - the same search on Google News gives me 78 hits, but I haven't examined them. That the series has been reported on over an extended period of time (and coverage will presumably continue) is in its favour. —S MALL  JIM   09:46, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I would still recommend to merge and redirect, with the usual caveat of no prejudice to recreate if new sources are identified to meet GNG.—Bagumba (talk) 10:09, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, maybe not the most notable rivalry but meets WP:GNG with sources already in article, and more can be found although I'm not sure if they provide much additional information. A section could be added to the rivalries article, although the results table and infobox don't appear in sections for the other rivalries so would probably be lost if this is merged which is a reason to have a separate page if it's going to be kept up to date. Peter&#160;E.&#160;James (talk) 19:44, 31 May 2012 (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.