Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Memorial Day Miracle


 * 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 Keep. - Krakatoa  Katie  11:50, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Memorial Day Miracle

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable. Fails WP:NEO, as there are no reliable, verifiable sources using the term. The article is completely unsourced. Pablo  Talk  |  Contributions  20:41, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 00:25, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 00:25, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Okay, I never heard of it, but it's apparently a great moment in pro basketball history, right up there with the Immaculate Reception, the Miracle on Ice, the Helicopter Game, etc. Mandsford 00:28, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep It's not on par with the Miracle on Ice, but it's an interesting moment in NBA history. The NBA itself lists Sean Elliott's game as a legendary performance; in addition, the book 'At the Buzzer' devotes an entire section to Elliott's game-winning shot (which also appears on the cover of the book - see top image). As for the nom's claim that "there are no reliable, verifiable sources using the term," I found 91 Google News hits for "memorial day miracle" + "sean elliott"; the term also appears in the two sources I mentioned above. Zagalejo 02:23, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, there seems to be many reliable sources for the event and the name; there seems to be a very clear link to the NBA reference at the bottom of the article. How did you go about determining that there were no 'sources using the term'?  Kuru  talk  01:34, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep, I remember the moment well and it was an extremely important event in basketball that needs to have an article.--Southern Texas 05:04, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. There are plenty of sources, as Zagalejo says, that use the term "Memorial Day Miracle." However, I still think the article covers a non-notable topic. Mention of it certainly belongs on relevant pages (such as Sean Elliott, San Antonio Spurs, 1999 NBA Playoffs, etc.) but the shot in itself is not notable. It received significant coverage as described in the notability guidelines, but only because every NBA game is covered by mainstream media. There are no separate articles for John Havlicek's dramatic steal or buzzer-beaters by John Paxson and Robert Horry. I know this is the dreaded what about X argument, but I think it's reasonable to assume that those events form a solid peer group. Articles in the category "National Basketball Association lore" (of which the MDM article is a part of) point to an individual player's page such as Gar Heard; why should this be different? Slic e NYC (Talk) 21:18, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * It's not necessarily just the shot; the name refers to the game itself, which was an improbable comeback capped by a rather difficult shot. If you want to play the 'what about x' game, you can probably find hundreds of articles on notable individual games, including basketball ones: The Phantom Buzzer Game, The Shot.  I'm sure they have varying levels of subjective notability; I certainly wouldn't compare this to the Miracle on Manchester or the Music City Miracle (ok, maybe that one), but it is clearly referenced as a significant historical, not current, NBA event in news media and books as noted above. It's possible I'm missing your point; you're saying you're comfortable that it meets the notability guidelines, but not your personal threshold for inclusion?  Kuru  talk  00:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm saying that the guidelines can be deceptive. Sure, the game received lots of coverage that would qualify it as notable, but that's because NBA playoff games are highly scrutinized events even if it's a blowout. Informally surveying the basketball articles on here, it seems like notable games are incorporated into the playoff series' article or the individual players article. Also, I'd prefer not to conflate the shot and the game as you seem to be doing; the shot makes the game better-known. If the game was decided by one point but without a last-second shot, odds are nobody thinks to create a page for it even if there was a big comeback. Slic e NYC (Talk) 15:09, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. I know nothing about basketball but I assume that the NBA site is reasonably authoritative for the sport. Although this is the only source establishing notability, I think it's just enough. Kim Dent-Brown   (Talk to me)  09:27, 24 June 2007 (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.