Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manchester United F.C. 9–0 Ipswich Town F.C.


 * 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   no consensus. Quite frankly, I am wondering why this AFD is yielding a different result from Articles for deletion/Newcastle United F.C. 8–0 Sheffield Wednesday F.C., but I cannot in good faith say that I can see a consensus for deletion, and with the article being verifiable I cannot see a compelling policy based reason to overrule and the community and delete regardless either. If I had voted in this AFD, I would have gone with "delete", because a record for the top English league since 1992-1993 is a news story, not a sporting history story. In any league, one or more games during the last 20 seasons will be the largest victory, or the game with the most goals, or the game with the most red cards, and so on. The consequence is that any league will (in principle) be able to produce individual articles for all sorts of footballing records made in that particular league, and I am unconvinced that this is a good idea.

I find the keep votes here unpersuasive, as they are largely a version of "it's notable", or "it's a game I remember". But I didn't really find the delete votes convincing either, they are assertions of non-notability, and Google News hits is hardly in indicator of notability either. The "keep" side is clearly in a majority. In football terms on who's got the best points here, I would call this a 0-0 draw, which defaults to "no consensus". Sjakkalle (Check!)  14:06, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Manchester United F.C. 9–0 Ipswich Town F.C.

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d3/WikEd_fullscreen.png

Recent consensus is that high scoring games and games that set share a record are not notable.Articles for deletion/Tottenham Hotspur F.C. 9–1 Wigan Athletic F.C. Cptnono (talk) 06:06, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Follow-up since I left out my personal thoughts: I do think it is notable but the admin made it clear that consensus said otherwise in an article that's notability is similar (if not the exact same).Cptnono (talk) 06:15, 19 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions.  —Cptnono (talk) 06:07, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - This match is notable. Even disregarding contemporary sources, there is still plenty of media coverage of the match. Furthermore, this match is the biggest win in Premier League history and featured the first time that one player has scored five goals in one game. The match was talked about a lot at the time, and it will continue to be talked about for years to come. – PeeJay 06:11, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Think this match is notable (and anyway I'd like to encourage more articles of this type). If anyone ever gets around to actually creating notabilty guidelines for matches, the fact that in some way the match broke some record (e.g. scoring, attendance etc.) might be a useful start? It could save some editors alot of trouble creating stuff. As a side issue why is Liverpool 5–0 Nottingham Forest (1988) notable?--Egghead06 (talk) 06:35, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. This match should be described in 1994–95 Manchester United F.C. season. Malleus Fatuorum 14:19, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - one of the most notable games of the Premier League, and one of my strongest, earliest footballing memories. GiantSnowman 18:08, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 18:10, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm reluctant to !vote delete because I think this is notable. That said, this may be on course for a keep. I don't get what makes this game in which one team scored the highest number of goals in PL history, with a player scoring the most individual goals in one PL game, different to the other one. The clean sheet? The fact that it came first? I want this article to be kept, but without guidance on that potential inconsistency I'm not sure which way to go. For the benefit of people that come into this AfD later, I'd be grateful if I can get through this one without being personally attacked for daring to point out when users are misinterpreting or misapplying policy. --WFC-- 05:35, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Well since there are two deletion discussions ongoing and a third was deleted, we could put this on hold and open an RfC on notability per the football specific guidelines. This gets a little screwy for me since I automatically go for GNG which would make all three notable. Might be better to hash out at the project page though. It is interesting that one is swingeing keed one is swinging delete, and the other was deleted.Cptnono (talk) 05:40, 20 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Agree with Malleus Fatuorum that it belongs in the team's season page. Also agree with Egghead06 that guidelines need to be created for match notability.  Miles Blues  (talk · contribs) 15:51, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep, because the submission does not make a correct rationale. This match did set a record, which Tottenham 9–1 Wigan did not. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 18:23, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I tink I get what you are getting at. This match "set" the record while the other one just equaled it?Cptnono (talk) 18:30, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That only really makes sense if the proposal is to delete this article if and when a higher scoring game comes along. Malleus Fatuorum 19:14, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Whether the match set a record or not is immaterial, as is whether or not you believe the nominator's rationale to be correct. How many people can you see doing a search on "Manchester United F.C. 9–0 Ipswich Town F.C.", for instance? Malleus Fatuorum 18:27, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * They may not search for that exact title, but I can imagine quite a few people looking for an article about this match. After all, it was the first time any player scored five goals in a Premier League game and it's also the biggest win in the Premier League. To be honest, it satisfies the GNGs, so why should we delete it? – PeeJay 19:45, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Would you agree to its deletion if tomorrow there was a 10–0 match in which one player scored six goals? Malleus Fatuorum 20:26, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Possibly, but that doesn't change the fact that the game meets the general notability guidelines, in that it has had significant coverage in the media - and I'm not just talking about match reports that were written on the day of the game. People have written reams about this game in the 15 years since it happened. – PeeJay 20:32, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * So that's a "no" then, which I think makes the point. Malleus Fatuorum 20:43, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep They are still talking about this match. I've heard it mentioned more than once recently on Canadian TV. Nfitz (talk) 23:24, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. The rationale is still based on a false premise, because this match set the record, it didn't share it (and still doesn't). Jmorrison230582 (talk) 07:44, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. One of my earlier football memories; although creating a guidline for notable matches would be nice. Argyle 4 Life  talk  19:59, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete No coverage the last month on news.google.com, so why is it notable? A lot of votes here don't refer to any outside data, but simply claim notability a priori. Precedent set at the 9-1 deletion debate. Sandman888 (talk) Latest PR 11:55, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The event happened more than 15 years ago, so of course there won't be any coverage at Google News! This match is notable. – PeeJay 13:56, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Well then books and such on the match must be available. The burden of proof is on the creator to assert notability, and the arguments here are mainly "it is notability per this comment" or because the GNG makes an exception for records(?). Sandman888 (talk) Latest PR 14:01, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The logic behind the last point is that every professional football match ever played would meet the main points of WP:GNG, but fail the WP:NOTNEWS test. Matches which set league records have ongoing coverage (ie this game is referred to each time a team comes close to breaking the record), which the vast majority of league matches don't. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 20:36, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * This match is already covered in a short paragraph in 1994–95 Manchester United F.C. season, which says just about as much as this article does but with added context. Malleus Fatuorum 20:47, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - I'd like to see the number of football match articles grow, and I think the guidelines on notable matches need to be relaxed, somewhat, and formally written down. It's never going to get to a point where people are adding routine matches, but games which are pivotal, or unusually high-scoring, or entertaining, should pass notablity, provided it can be sourced. This article fits notability, it's memorable in the way that most League games aren't. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 12:45, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * To go further, I think that what's currently accepted is notable - far less notable matches are passed, as long as a trophy is collected out at the end, like with Charity Shields and even exhibition matches. I'm not saying these articles should go, far from it, but I think we should be trying to describe and expand on the history of football, and if certain matches play a part in that, and a part in the history of one or both of the clubs, then they should be included. This has to be justified and sourced, of course, but I think there's room for leeway. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 12:54, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - I am not sure there is a consensus that "high scoring games and games that set (share) a record are not notable." One particular article got deleted, but that doesn't mean this one necessarily should be.  The nom sounds a lot like WP:ALLORNOTHING.  If there are independent reliable sources for the game, then this game may indeed be notable.  While those sources need to be added to the article, since the nominator himself claims that he believes this game is notable, I am confident they exist. Rlendog (talk) 01:21, 26 August 2010 (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.