Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/College football playoff debate


 * 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 speedy keep per SK1. No valid reason has been given for deletion, Essentially you could've avoided wasting everyones time by adding the outdated template to it. (non-admin closure) – Davey 2010 Talk 23:36, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

College football playoff debate

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article no longer reflects college footballs post season and has not been updated. Information on this page can be found on other related wiki articles and are up to date. Most of its information relies on opinion editorials Quickone (talk) 14:38, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Needs cleanup and updating, not deletion. The debate was indeed quite notable, and that notability means that the article should exist. That said, the articles need better coordination and structure. Firstly, there's no reason to have a separate Plus-One system article (alluded to by the nom), as that is part of the debate and a separate article is undue weight; that should totally be merged with the debate article as it is just one of the many aspects of the debate. And the debate article does need better coordination with the main article at College Football Playoff, making clearer that the debate was essentially the background to the current system. In other words, the debate article should serve as the main article on the background, and the background section at the main article should be just a brief summary that links via section hatnote to the debate article. oknazevad (talk) 15:10, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep If it was notable once, it's notable now. Argument that it's no longer notable doesn't really work. Wikipedia is not a newspaper. Notability is not based on whether something is current. Smartyllama (talk) 19:00, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. They're still talking about it, if not as vociferously as before. Once notable, always notable. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:28, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:55, 25 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep, as notability is not temporary, and anyway article is well referenced, showing that the subject meets WP:GNG. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:05, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep and Speedy Keep. Abraham Lincoln has been dead a long time but we won't delete his page either.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:45, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:NTEMP. Definitely has historical value as part of the history of college football. Ejgreen77 (talk) 23:48, 26 September 2016 (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.