Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Louisville-Virginia football rivalry


 * 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. Yunshui 雲 水 12:43, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Louisville-Virginia football rivalry

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:NRIVALRY says "Sports rivalries are not inherently notable" and defers to WP:GNG. GNG states "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." Rivalry is not establish via current citations which lightly cover game (series) results which is only six games to date. There is some routine coverage in some search results showing slight, but not significant (or national), coverage. WP:TOOSOON. UW Dawgs (talk) 14:33, 21 June 2018 (UTC)


 * I think it is difficult to accurately judge the relevance of a rivalry by the means you have described. If you feel that it is not as meaningful as others, I think that would be worth adding to the article, but I certainly feel as though it exists and therefore is deserving of note in an encyclopedic manner. Additionally, the number of games is less of indication of the existence of the rivalry and more an indication of conference realignment and perhaps a comment on the rising relevancy of Louisville's athletics. Also, to say that it does not have enough citations is confusing to me, for it has 6 sentences total and four citations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nolanwebb (talk • contribs) 17:48, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:31, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kentucky-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:31, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:31, 23 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep The subject is a perhaps not very widely known but it is quite established, in terms of Wikipedia, as notable. -The Gnome (talk) 18:07, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Currently, the article contains zero WP:RS citations for the rivalry claim. WP:GNG requires "significant coverage in reliable sources" where " 'significant coverage' addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material."  Hence this AFD, as the article topic is entirely unsupported at the moment. UW Dawgs (talk) 19:59, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I see some: the SB Nation ("Ye Olde Virginia-Louisville Rivalrye", 2014); the Cardinal Connection ("Five In-Conference Rivalries I Care More About Than Virginia, And So Should You", 2016); Vox Media ("A Kentucky Fan: I hate Louisville and So Should You", 2015). -The Gnome (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * 1. is a 2014 general/basketball article, when the football teams had played only twice, most recently in 1989. 2. is the author's opinion piece which references the conference's (ACC) positioning re football scheduling. "the conference has been shoving Virginia in our faces, telling us they’re our most heated rivals now." and "We may be stuck in this forced rivalry with Virginia, but that doesn’t mean the ACC can make me care about it" 3. is a 2015 aggregation by SB Nation's Virginia site of fan comments from "a Kentucky Wildcats community". "The Conference dubbed Louisville-Virginia as permanent cross-division rivals, but a rivalry is not made overnight. Instead, we reached out to SB Nation's A Sea of Blue, a Kentucky Wildcats community, to ask them why we should hate the Cardinals."
 * Again, currently there are zero RS citations of an actual football rivalry, much less any "significant coverage" as required by GNG. UW Dawgs (talk) 17:48, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete Even what little coverage exists doesn't appear to be taking the "rivalry" seriously. "Rivalries" which only receive coverage for being bad imitations of rivalries fail WP:NRIVALRY, and except in rare cases like the Civil Conflict, they fail GNG as well. And this doesn't have nearly the coverage of that thing, whatever you want to call it. Smartyllama (talk) 17:39, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 11:42, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per the analysis presented by the nom. This is WP:TOOSOON. shoy (reactions) 15:35, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete the only sources I can find that even call this a "rivalry" are fan blogs, one by an editor named "Steak n Eggs" or something like that. Pretty sure we can chalk those up to the "non-reliable-source" column, and we're left with scores.  Nowhere near the standards that we typically look for in establishing a rivalry article here on Wikipedia.  try another wiki?--Paul McDonald (talk) 18:11, 29 June 2018 (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.