Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Georgia Tech 222, Cumberland 0


 * 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 of the debate was keep. Johnleemk | Talk 12:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Georgia Tech 222, Cumberland 0
Found during stubsorting. Not only is it a bad title, it's something that should be mentioned in the article on the teams involved. If the teams don't deserve articles the game doesn't either. I'm not sure if it can be merged as I'm not aware of naming conventions for these sports teams, but if merging isn't an option, this should be deleted. - Mgm|(talk) 12:14, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Individual articles on football games notable only for extreme scorelines are not encyclopedic. --Squiddy | (squirt ink?)  14:11, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Was going to suggest Merging with Cumberland University since this seems to have precipitated them dropping their football program, but it's already there. I doubt the article could be expanded further, so delete. Wrathchild 14:40, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Squiddy. Stifle 15:05, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Squiddy. --kingboyk 16:48, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete This can be mentioned on each teams' article page, if required. -- (aeropagitica)  17:06, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete pa. Dan 17:55, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and move to Georgia Tech v. Cumberland, 1916. There's been a recent discussion as to whether individual sports results are worthy of inclusion; no consensus appears to have been reached generally.  There does seem to be a faint consensus that non-routine, highly unusual or record-setting results are notable.  This would count.  Smerdis of Tlön 20:26, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and move to Georgia Tech v. Cumberland, 1916. Ive seen this score cited a bazillion times in various formats. More than just a fact to be collected. Youngamerican 20:57, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand. Important in college football history. -- JJay 21:23, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * KEEP as per JJay...this is what happens when non-Americans try to dictate what is important to Americans...they try and delete things that are significant that they've never heard of....i bet there are plenty of soccer entries i could AFD using this criteria. WillC 23:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. Remember to assume good faith here. I doubt its any New World Order/European Union conspiracy against to make us like soccer and techno music. I can assure you that any articles dealing with soccer get as much scrutiny as those American football. I think those that disagree with us find this to be random trivia and/or a crappy article with a bad title. We think the article has merit. That is the only difference. I do think that there should be another name for the article, as the current title sounds a bit odd. However, we are all here to make wikipedia a better resource. Youngamerican 00:33, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * ...there are plenty of soccer entries i could AFD using this criteria Try cricket instead: some crazed cricket fans created articles for EVERY game in the English league's season last year. --Calton | Talk 01:42, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and move per Smerdis. I'm normally against articles on regular-season games, but this event is famous. -- Mwalcoff 00:27, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nothing here. When there's enough material for even a halfway decent stub, then break it out from Cumberland University. --Calton | Talk 01:42, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and Move per Smerdis. Cumberland's page on the subject is quite amusing.--SarekOfVulcan 01:48, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Ok, maybe the title could be better, but I started this article and was hoping it could be expanded on.  I am new to wikipedia and learning the ropes and hoping to make my own little contribution.  Maybe I should study the protocols better but I stand by that this is a significant entry and those who recommended deletion are very unconvincing and only justify their arguments based on easily correctible technicalities.  I see bits and pieces about this game around the net and was hoping it could come to some coherence.  The fact that some have expaned on it makes it worthwhile and that, in the end, was what I was hoping for.  -- MrMurph101
 * Keep and move per Smerdis - precedent already set with the articles in Category:National Football League lore. Sam Vimes 12:52, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and move per Smerdis. Notable game in football history.  --FrankCostanza 20:32, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and move per Smerdis. --Arcadian 21:56, 6 January 2006 (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.