Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grazer AK 1902 0–1 SK Sturm Graz


 * 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 merge to Draft:Graz derby. There is weak consensus for a merger. Merging does not require draftification, it can be done from mainspace. If this title is a reasonable search term (I don't think it is, but it wasn't discussed here, and a unilateral decision would be inappropriate) it should be kept as a redirect; otherwise, a histmerge is needed before this is deleted. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:08, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Grazer AK 1902 0–1 SK Sturm Graz

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails WP:GNG due to a lack of significant coverage. Individual match not clearly more notable than any other rivalry matchup in football or any matchup between two major clubs. Most of the coverage looks routine and the content could easily be redirected and merged into the 2022–23 Austrian Cup. Not clear why this individual matchup merits an article outside of the cup article. Jay eyem (talk) 04:13, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Jay eyem (talk) 04:13, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:55, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete not a notable enough match for its own article. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:51, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Do not delete this articel because this match was a special football game for Austrian football fans and it is very good that a user (according to his own profile page he is not Austrian but a Polish user) created an article of this match on English Wikipedia. There is a bunch of uninteresting articles from English football matches that will not be deleted, but one particular and important Austrian match article should be deleted.  I do not understand that.  The English Wikipedia still seems too focused on the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland + the United States of America from my understanding. (talk) 17:46, 21 October 2022 (CEST)
 * Delete - this individual match is not notable. GiantSnowman 18:26, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:55, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep:
 * This AfD really is patent nonsense, and I sincerely doubt anyone has actually looked at the article and come up with this, but even so, the rationale is just so out of touch with the actual article I wonder whether this part of en masse nomination that frequently happens at AfD. Furthermore I cannot believe there are two "deletes" without a shred of justification in either, I can only assume it's again due to AfD hopping. Also I note this is AfD was done via twinkle, so I wonder whether this is just a mistake altogether.
 * Firstly it sure does not in any way fail WP:GNG. There are 13 references from 4 countries in 3 languages with plenty WP:RS; including Kicker, one of the biggest sports magazines in the world, Die Presse and ORF.
 * Secondly lack of significant coverage &  Most of the coverage looks routine and the content could easily be redirected and merged : there a wide range of dates and articles with various topics surrounding the match, from build-up to aftermath, whole sections and interviews with club legends, importance of the match, the historical background, the preparation on and off-field.
 *  Most of the coverage looks routine really so heavy police preparation, pigs being hung from motorway bridges, and one in a generation match-up is routine now? Because that is what the articles are about.
 * Individual match not clearly more notable Clearly it is, it's even within the lead as to why, but if in doubt, there's a background and build-up section just in case.
 * I am not sure what could possibly be done to make this anymore clear. Furthermore there are many more articles on this particular match and hopefully someone will expand it in the future when the impact of this game will be even clearer. The supposed lack of notability seems to be personal subjective opinion rather than actually based on the article content itself. To me this seems like "I don't like it" and systemic bias because this happens to be two Austrian teams; I sincerely doubt this would be even nominated if the Merseyside derby or similar happened in the 1/8 FA Cup after a sudden 15 year gap with so much happening prior and during the match. Abcmaxx (talk) 23:49, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
 * On what possible grounds do you justify a speedy keep for this? Let's take a look at the sourcing in the article then:
 * sport.orf.at this is clearly routine coverage of a sporting event. It details highlights of the match and gives post-match quotes. Everything about this piece is routine sports coverage.
 * die Presse This one is unfortunately behind a paywall, but judging by the first couple of paragraphs it appears to be detailing the circumstances leading up to the match which is very common with any major sporting event. Looks routine.
 * derbyderbyderby.it detailing the circumstances leading up to the match. Like the previous source, routine.
 * Kronen Zeitung 1 a four paragraph piece by a local paper doing a feature on the derby by interviewing a former player. Pretty routine.
 * Kronen Zeitung 2 Details increased police presence due to a rivalry match. But this is true of any contentious derby match in any league in the world and does nothing to establish the notability of this particular match. Routine.
 * graz.at This is the website for the city of Graz providing a history lesson and important information about the match, including quotes from local politicians. An unusual source to establish the notability for such a match, and probably the next closest to significant coverage, but not clear why this merits an individual article rather than inclusion within the cup article.
 * Kronen Zeitung 3 rival fans hang a pig from a highway. Have absolutely no idea why this is supposed to make this matchup more notable, and antics like this are common in all rivalry matches. Routine.
 * Kicker post-match report details, this is absolutely routine coverage even though it is from Kicker.
 * ultras-tifo.net have absolutely no idea how this is supposed to contribute to notability for this article.
 * laola1-at fairly lengthy details on fan activities leading up to and during the match, including discussion on the use of pyrotechnics and discussion on future matches. Definitely the best source thus far.
 * Kleine Zeitung another piece that is behind a paywall. Appears to be an opinion piece questioning the actions of some of the supporters. Not clear how this supports the notability of the match.
 * Wiener Zeitung post-match details and summary. Routine.
 * steiermark.orf.at More post-match details and summary. Routine.
 * So ultimately the vast majority of sources used in the article consist of routine coverage of the match or details leading up to the match, with some in-depth focus on fan activities. What the sources DON'T show is why this merits its own individual article rather than detailed inclusion in the cup article or in the article for the parent clubs. It's not a cup final, which would absolutely be presumed notable as far as I am concerned, and there doesn't appear to be any lasting impact beyond local coverage of the event, which was one of the main arguments in the Real Madrid - Sheriff discussion that I think holds true here. One of the reasons we don't detail out every match between major clubs (or countries), even though there are many more notable matchups than this one (e.g. every World Cup match) is because not every match merits an article even though they may all receive a high volume of coverage, as is typical in sports. Consider the 2014 FIFA World Cup, where the only match other than the final to have an article is the 7-1 drubbing Germany gave Brazil, and that's because it has had a lasting impact on the sport. The notion that every rivalry matchup that receives a high volume of coverage (number of countries and languages of sources frankly being a bit irrelevant), as every rivalry does, merits its own article is absolutely absurd. If there is evidence that this match will have a lasting impact on the sport, it is sorely missing from the article and this discussion. Jay eyem (talk) 01:20, 22 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Response
 * What you have done here is reduced every source that describes the match as "routine coverage". Well its not, of course some the sources describe the match, how can they not. But if you read each of the what you call so called "routine" it is not routine at all. Because all them mention the build-up, the fact that it is the first in 15 years, that Austrian football needs these kind of matches are needed and that they receive an unprecedented interest from Austrian football fans. One the sources label the match as "historic".


 * Kleine Zeitung is not behind a paywall, just need to accept cookies. But you are accepting that these are credible sources, and there are even references that even you can fault or picky holes in, yet none of this rationale was mentioned in your initial deletion proposal. You're now backtracking on a hastilly done AfD.


 * lasting impact beyond local coverage well the sources aren't actually local, bar one. They're all national or international so that is just not true. Most of these wouldn't even report on Austrian football.


 * The notion that every rivalry (...) deserves an article is absolutely absurd. No-one is saying that here at all. This particular match is relevant because it signifies a return of GAK "back from the dead" and the restoration of Austria's fiercest city derby after a 15 year gap, having beeen previously a longstanding frequent event. It is one a few rivalries that still generate interest. The only other match in Austrian football that generates any kind of international response is the Vienna derby Rapid-Austia, and that is somewhat stale as hapoens twice a year every year and Rapid are have been dominant for a while, both on and off the pitch; the LASK-BW Linz derby is also not very frequent for even longer. And you can't compare this to the World Cup, apples and oranges.


 * that's because it has had a lasting impact on the sport so does this, albeit on Austrian football.


 * Abcmaxx (talk) 09:35, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Trying to access Kleine Zeitung but for me also it puts up a paywall, even with cookies. Tried to register for free temporary subscription (requires cancellation) but that requires an Austrian street address. Anyway I'm not sure yet if it is possible to save this, but my main advice would be to try to make a stronger argument within the article about the historical significance and (lasting) notability, because the way it reads right now, it's not convincing to people who aren't familiar with Austrian football. Cielquiparle (talk) 09:58, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * No, I'm sorry, your rationale to keep is completely ridiculous. Talking about buildup and a history of a rivalry is absolutely part of routine coverage of any rivalry. And this was not hastily done, I looked through the sourcing and considered the circumstance and am of the belief that what is present here does not merit an individual article, and we have precedent for other such matches gaining significant media attention, often much more than the sourcing provided here, being merged into a parent article, such as the Real Madrid-Sheriff match that I mentioned. The reason I didn't detail that all out initially is because that would have been a completely inappropriate way to start an AFD. I would expect many more major international sources outside of the German Sprachraum discussing the significance of this match to the sport as a whole, not just Austria, which has not yet been provided. Again, the Kicker source is definitely routine coverage. Maybe this belongs on a rivalry page between the two clubs, I notice that such an article doesn't exist as of yet, but the very localized nature of this article without a clear lasting impact on the sport AS A WHOLE doesn't merit an entire article. Jay eyem (talk) 12:48, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I would happily commit to work on it but the prospect of putting all that hard work in for someone only to delete because they reduce it all to "I don't like it because never heard of it" makes it a daunting prospect. The build-up and aftermath sections are ripe for expansion as is the whole article in general, and it is in the srticle i hasten to add already. Nowhere does it say a new article has to be FA quality from the get-go, besides its too much to do for just one editor, the while purpose of this was that other people, preferably germanophones, will expand it. This really is much better quality than a lot of existing match articles already, why are we holding Austrian football to a higher standard than let's say, Scottish football? Abcmaxx (talk) 12:51, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * There is a whole lot of WP:OSE in that argument. Just because there are other articles of poorer quality doesn't mean anything for this one. The issue is that this article doesn't clearly have a lasting impact on the sport as a whole. At this point I think we have reached an impasse, but if you can prove lasting notability of the match as a whole then be bold and add it. Jay eyem (talk) 13:16, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * you're comparing a Champions League match to a city derby, and this AfD is ridiculous, and you know fully well you cited WP:GNG which you now backtrack on. The requirement for an article is not that it has to affect the whole world and the entire sport, it just has to to be suitably covered in independent sources which it is, and your initial AfD suggested it wasn't. By citing such a rationale initially youre gaming the system and manipulating in order to force through your own point of view. Now you're clinging onto this "routine" argument except it is clearly shown its not a routine match. Anyway local would be Graz district or the state news, not the entire country. Why are you holding this to a higher standard than Scottish or English match articles? None of them have German or Spanish sources 13:01, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Except I didn't backtrack on WP:GNG at all. WP:GNG discusses significant coverage, as opposed to routine coverage. WP:ROUTINE discusses that routine coverage of an event, which seems to be the case here, does not mean an event merits its own individual article. You are now making this entire AFD WAY too personal and have started attacking me individually. I notice that you were recently blocked for edit warring related to this match, so you are clearly very involved in the existence of this match, but there is no need to respond to my arguments with such personal attacks. Jay eyem (talk) 13:16, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * none of what I said is personal, I am merely criticising your AfD rationale, decision to create one in the first place, and high inconsistency and logical fallacy thereafter. They are points I am perfectly entitled to make, none of what I said is about you as a person nor have I been uncivil. Abcmaxx (talk) 18:03, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * You accused me of WP:GAMING without evidence and multiple times accused me of forcing my own view rather than address my policy-based arguments. That is 100% uncivil And yet it is worth noting that I have not been recently involved in any edit wars on this matter, whereas you have. Do we need to take this to WP:ANI? Jay eyem (talk) 21:49, 22 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Merge content and references to SK Sturm Graz and Grazer AK, as an alternative to deletion per WP:ATD. Appreciate that a lot of effort went into creating the match-specific content for this article, including citations; meanwhile, each of the actual club pages are sorely lacking in references. Therefore, it could only benefit the encyclopedia *and* improve WP coverage of Austrian football if the key highlights of this match were incorporated into the individual club articles, including citations. Even if it were only one sentence plus one reference added to each article, it would be a net gain for Wikipedia. Cielquiparle (talk) 09:16, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * If this amount of information about 1 match was merged anywhere it would de labelled WP:UNDUE and deleted. Abcmaxx (talk) 09:36, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * That's why I've qualified by saying only the highlights or even just one sentence per club page. Cielquiparle (talk) 09:46, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Maybe an article detailing the rivalry itself would be a more appropriate place to merge? I'd be ok with the creation of such a rivalry page and seeing this information merged. There's surely more history to the rivalry as a whole that can be detailed out on such a page. Plus it's really strange that you would have so much prose on an ostensibly historic single match between two historic clubs without even an article on the rivalry itself. Jay eyem (talk) 12:48, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * But the existence of this article is no way relevant to poor sourcing elsewhere or lack content. If anything it shows how much better this article is than nearly all the articles on Austrian football, not sure why this is held to an absurd standard when even top team articles in Austria are lacking. Abcmaxx (talk) 12:51, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * What are the chances of someone AfD-ing Graz derby straight after its creation? I'm not going to keep creating articles if they're just going to cause grief and held to impossible standards not set elsewhere. Abcmaxx (talk) 13:01, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't see what the impossible standard is here. I could create an article on any major rivalry match with similar level of sourcing. It doesn't mean each match would merit an individual article. I think a newly created article on the rivalry would absolutely be an appropriate target, it just doesn't exist yet. Plus it is really strange to have such an extensive article to an ostensibly historic match without even an article on the rivalry itself. Jay eyem (talk) 13:16, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * We have ridiculous "rivalry" articles like Cavalry FC–Forge FC rivalry, which has way more routine coverage and no background on two teams with no history, except for one coach inexcusably being racist one time. Apparently that merits an article. There's 2022–23 SV Elversberg season, a lower league team season with 2 references. There's the 1950–51 DDR-Oberliga championship play-off with 1 reference. You haven't nominated any of these, you picked an article with so much in it instead. Abcmaxx (talk) 13:26, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * have you actually read the article why this particular match is different? I will happily creat Graz derby article if this article is kept. I'll even commit to expanding this one. Otherwise I see no point as I will spend more time explaining WP:GNG and why in an article about a German speaking country the sources tend to be in German. Abcmaxx (talk) 13:31, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, your personal opinion on other articles, as well as your opinion that said teams have "no history", is entirely irrelevant here. This an entirely an WP:OSE argument. I am absolutely a proponent of tighter restrictions on notability, but that doesn't mean I am going to nominate every single article for deletion because it is a long and exhausting process. And none of that is relevant to the argument for notability here. And for the love of god, PLEASE make all of your posts at once. It is a pain to have to re-type my post because of edit conflicts. Jay eyem (talk) 13:35, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * two teams which are 3 years old, these two have over 150 years each; I am aware of "other stuff exists" I'm just highlighting the imbalance, besides the argument that other Austrian football articles are poor and so this should be merged is the same argument. You chose to nominate this one, which is one of the better cited match articles on Wikipedia it seems, and your reasoning is entirely inconsistent. Either hold all articles to the same standard or if you must keep going to AfD I suggest starting with something with a lot less going for it. Yes it is a long and exhausting process, especially for someone who put in a lot of work in creating an article, so either stop going to AfD and help improve the articles or take time and care when nominating. You said you'd accept accept this article if it was called "Graz derby", which not only shows that this does in fact pass WP:GNG, but if I renamed this article then it would only be about one match, and I bet you someone will AfD it "not notable, only describes one meeting." Lose-lose either way. Abcmaxx (talk) 13:53, 22 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep and rename as Merge with Draft:Graz derby. Changing from previous "merge" vote, as this seems like a great solution and you wouldn't even have to add/change that much, IMO. If the event itself meets WP:GNG but a single match doesn't merit its own article per the WikiProject, then the derby page does seem like the next best thing, plus it provides much-needed context for why the match was so significant. (Also, quite frankly, not that many people will be searching for "Grazer AK 1902 0–1 SK Sturm Graz" as an exact search term.) Anyway from the discussion this is sounding increasingly like it's a naming/reframing/writing issue rather than a notability problem, and in that case let's keep it and try to make it the best "Graz derby" page it could possibly be. Cielquiparle (talk) 14:32, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * A move works for me. There is already an article in German that can be used as a basis for expansion, you can just stick a Template:Expand German template and start from there. Jay eyem (talk) 14:53, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * but this article does not talk about the rivalry, other than briefly in the background section does it, it describes the specific match and aftermath. I repeat that the absence of other articles does not justify a reason for getting rid of this. This is a strange development for an AfD that claimed this did not pass WP:GNG and was a non-notable event that should be merged into a cup article. Clearly now the consensus is that it does pass WP:GNG but needs to be somehow got rid of anyway. It really tiring having new articles questioned by meritless AfDs, which almost never pass. If wanted a merger, then the correct process would be a move template, or create a Graz derby page and propose a merger then. This has become tantamount to throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks. Abcmaxx (talk) 17:57, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * No I maintain that the individual match fails GNG and shouldn't have its own article, I don't know where you arrived to the conclusion that the consensus was otherwise. I was just agreeing with the proposal that the content could be merged into a newly created article about the derby as a whole. And there is a pretty extensive list of AFDs in the archives of individual matches that have either been redirected or outright deleted, so it's not like this AFD was without precedent. Jay eyem (talk) 21:49, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I have taken the liberty of starting the draft for the article at Draft:Graz derby. There is plenty of room for using the corresponding article in German, so I will probably look into expanding it further over the course of the coming week. Once it is in a manageable state, it can be moved into the main article space. Jay eyem (talk) 04:14, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Relisting comment: I've read through this entire AFD and opinions are all over the map. Before creating new articles and talking about Merging this article into a Draft article, should this article be Kept? Mergers can be decided afterwards through talk page discussions. For the closer's sake, please do not make overly complicated proposals that may, or may not, be carried out later. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:20, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - Per above. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 16:44, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Comment why would someone creating Draft:Graz derby be an actual reason to keep this? The derby could be notable, but this article, which is about one match, is not. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:04, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Fair...but I hadn't been expecting such a dramatic fork of the two (!). The way I see it, the nominated article has sources and sections worth keeping; the new draft derby article provides more context but lacks citations at the moment. Ideally they should be merged into one comprehensive article. I have changed my vote above, yet again, to !merge to Draft:Graz derby. I am also potentially available to help with the article if needed (but trying to tie up other loose ends at the moment). Cheers, Cielquiparle (talk) 13:06, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I'd be happy with a merge to Graz derby IF sources can be found about the Derby itself... GiantSnowman 21:23, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete on the basis of Liz's request above for a yes/no. Obviously there are interesting and unique factors to this individual match, but these are factors around the two clubs; generally WP articles on individual matches have exceptional circumstances in the scoreline or other on-field events. To me, this match and the events and coverage surrounding it falls around the larger rivalry between the clubs, so should be added to the nascent article on that. As per GS, of course sources should be used to demonstrate the notability of said rivalry, but I'm confident there will be plenty, particularly with the German article on the subject. A large section of that article could be devoted to this match while giving readers more information on its wider context. The current title would be an appropriate redirect, so hopefully the rivalry article could be fleshed out and populated with the match details by the time of this being closed to facilitate that. Crowsus (talk) 09:49, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Just as a quick update, I think I have translated as much of the prose as I can or thought was important to the article (there's an entire section on some tradition involving local butchers that didn't seem relevant). Part of the issue is that, like much of the German Wikipedia in my experience, the article doesn't have a lot of sources, and that has been an issue when finding match results prior to the 1950s. Maybe the resources exist in German and offline, I just wasn't able to find them on a first pass. I figure the article here at AfD would slot in towards the end of the "Notable Matches" section where it could be expanded on as needed. I could see about doing that tomorrow, I just have no idea if this AfD will get relisted again. Jay eyem (talk) 03:48, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Another update, I have merged what I thought was the most significant details of this article into Draft:Graz derby. I think draftifying is fine, but I'm not sure what else needs to be merged at this point. Additional input is always welcome, of course! Jay eyem (talk) 21:08, 5 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Draftify so we can merge with Draft:Graz derby, also per comment from . If we straight delete it, one of us will need to get it refunded and host it in User space, which seems less than ideal. At least if it lives in Draft, multiple people can access it and start merging parts of it with Graz derby. And then if nothing else happens, it will get deleted after six months. I understand it's just a subset that will get merged, but that is still a lot of work to have to recreate. This one has sources! (And in the course of merging, we may also end up using some of those sources in other ways.) Cielquiparle (talk) 10:20, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment Graz derby article seems like the right idea, I don't think you can straight up delete. Merge the right content and have a derby article. Govvy (talk) 13:49, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Draftify so that the merge with Draft:Graz derby can take place. I agree that this match isn't notable but the rivalry, as a whole, is. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:04, 4 November 2022 (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.