Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/College football lineal championship


 * 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--Tone 11:56, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

College football lineal championship

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This does not appear to be a notable topic. It cites no references or sources, and all the substantive edits seem to be by one individual. This article appears to consist primarily of original research, and while I am normally of the belief that such articles can be improved by adding sources, I have no reason to believe that any reliable sources on this topic exist. It's an interesting concept, but it should be expounded on someone's personal website, not Wikipedia. --SuperNova |T|C| 23:00, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Looks like an original research essay to me. NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 01:07, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment If a source can be found to back it up, it might be a keeper. I recall reading this type of thing in SI years ago, where someone bragged that St. Olaf or somewhere was the national basketball champ because it was the team, that beat the team, that beat the team, that...beat Chaminade, which was the team that beat Virginia.  On the other hand, if the author conceived of this, Wikipedia isn't the place to try out such ideas.  Might make a good article in the newsletter for CFRA, the College Football Researchers' Association.  Better to know it won't fly BEFORE you do this exercise over a 139 year stretch.  Mandsford (talk) 02:37, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete This article is totally unencyclopedic. Look at the first line: 'The College Football Lineal Championship is determined in the same manner as a boxing match.' This article seems to be a hoax. Masterpiece2000 (talk) 03:01, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think the article is a hoax per se. What the author is doing is starting with the first college football game ever, following the winning team until the next time it loses, then following the winner of that game until the next time it loses, and so on. That doesn't make it encyclopedic, but it's not a hoax, either. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 15:54, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as original research. It's an interesting idea for original research, albeit the current game-by-game listing is probably not the best way to discuss the topic. I recommend that whoever is conducting this research submit it to a site such as the College Football Data Warehouse instead. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:12, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - Really interesting, but original research. (ESkog)(Talk) 17:31, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete There's no such championship. The only sport in which 'the man who beat the man who beat the man' is really used as a concept is Boxing. Its use here is entirely meaningless. Nick mallory (talk) 13:58, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete This article is not a hoax, but it is original research. I have read that definition more carefully, and I agree with deletion. Collegefootball1869 (talk) 19:50, 26 December 2007 (UTC)Collegefootball1869


 * 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.