Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/South Carolina–Tennessee football rivalry (2nd nomination)


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. This article was deleted at AfD 8 years ago, but as we all know, consensus can change, and 8 years is a more than reasonable amount of time for consensus to change. This unsourced article was nominated for deletion a few hours after it was created, and dozens of sources were added over the next 48 hours, so arguably WP:HEY would encourage us to grant the author a bit more leniency for now. With that said, sources that qualify to establish the notability of this rivalry were thin, and consensus was split on whether this rivalry has become notable in the time since the last article was deleted. My suggestion would be to allow interested editors to continue building this article and finding sources to establish its notability. If, after a reasonable amount of time (at least a couple months), there are still questions as to the notability of this rivalry, then it can be re-nominated for deletion and the full breadth of available sources can be analyzed.  —&#8288;Scotty Wong &#8288;— 22:32, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

South Carolina–Tennessee football rivalry
AfDs for this article:


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

This page was nominated before in 2015 and deleted, discussion here. No sources cited in the new page. Per WP:GNG this is still not notable as a "football rivalry". All sources I can find are opinion pieces on how it should be considered one, of which I've found two. Glman99 (talk) 01:19, 22 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete ... I think even if it were slightly notable that a rivalry would need to be significantly notable to constitute it's own stand-alone article. To create it as it's own article and not even put in an attempt to provide sources? Get out of here haha.
 * Fireandflames2 (talk) 01:49, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Hey, I just started this article tonight, and have not had time to add sources and a notable games section, but there are sources that cite this as a rivalry even dating back all the way to 2011. https://bleacherreport.com/articles/912769-south-carolina-vs-tennessee-10-little-known-facts-about-southern-rivalry. I would like a little more time to add sources

Ok, I added two notable games (I plan on filling in several more in that section) and added in citations (with more to come). I hope this is enough for now. I do think this merits a rivalry now, especially with the series being tied 9-9 since 2005, and the fact that for South Carolina, Knoxville is the second-closet SEC school by geography.

It also should be noted that Tennessee and South Carolina could be paired up as permanent rivals if the SEC moves to a 9 game schedule https://www.tennessean.com/story/sports/2022/06/03/sec-football-schedule-nine-conference-games-permanent-rivals-expansion/9986455002/ Also, if South Carolina and Missouri can have a wikipedia page, then this series definitely can too. South Carolina and Tennessee are close geographically and have played for 30 years consecutively. SC and Missouri have played 13 times. The situation has changed from 2015 given the games over the last few years. Also see Greenville Online newspaper "Still, it's odd the Gamecocks' 2024 schedule won't feature Georgia, Tennessee or Florida, a trio that ranks as arguably their biggest SEC rivals." As well as the state newspaper " In an annual SEC rivalry dating back to 1992, that is Tennessee’s largest point spread against South Carolina since Oct. 30, 1999, when the Gamecocks visited Neyland Stadium." https://www.thestate.com/sports/college/university-of-south-carolina/usc-football/article268820602.html#storylink=cpy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tnsc20 (talk • contribs)
 * None of these sources point to a notable rivalry. The one in KnoxNews calls it a "divisional rivalry" which would also apply to other teams. The other two are from blogs or not notable sources doing routine coverage. As 2015, I remain unconvinced this is a notable rivalry worthy of a separate page on Wikipedia. Two teams playing often does not warrant a page. You mention Mayor's Cup (Missouri–South Carolina), the difference is that they play for a trophy. UT-SC do not. Glman99 (talk) 13:29, 22 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: American football, South Carolina,  and Tennessee.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:38, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Hey, I really am not trying to be argumentative or difficult, but I do not understand why this needs to be deleted. Just because it does not have a trophy does not mean it is not an important rivalry, as a trophy does not create animosity. Also, most SEC rivalries do not have trophies (none of Tennessee's other rivalries have one). This series has decided the east several times, and has a history of close competitive games. Also, the State Newspaper and Greenville Online are not blogs, they are reputable newspapers with widespread influence in South Carolina. They both quoted this as being a rivalry. I just dont understand what is harmful about having this page especially once I am able to finish out the notable games section. Its not like every rivalry that has its own page is Ohio State-Michigan, See Auburn-Ole Miss, Auburn-Tulane, Ole Miss-Tulane, LSU-Mississippi St, Georgia-Vanderbilt, Mississippi St-Alabama, Michigan-Northwestern. For instance, if Penn St and Maryland (Penn St leads 42-3-1) and Penn St Michigan can have pages, than certainly Tennessee and South Carolina can have one. I appreciate the concern and passion we have for college football rivalries, but do not understand what is harmful about a page for this series. There is a history here, and I have put time into making the page, and will continue to develop it. I really don't understand the need to delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tnsc20 (talk • contribs)
 * I understand you've put work into this, and I appreciate your contributions. However, just because WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS doesn't mean this page meets the notability guidelines for pages on Wikipedia. Some of those other "rivalries" you mentioned should probably be considered for deletion as well, some of them even have tags nothing they may not meet WP:GNG. I have yet to see convincing sources that this passes the notability check as a notable football rivalry. Glman99 (talk) 18:13, 22 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per source analysis by Glman99. Clearly not enough sigcov to pass GNG.  Frank   Anchor  18:11, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I will also make it clear that the continued WP:WALLSOFTEXT added by User:Tnsc20 will not impact my opinion on this topic. The sources brought up by this user are simply WP:ROUTINE game reports and summaries, but does not go on to describe how these teams would be rivals. The significant coverage required to describe this series as a "rivalry" simply is not there.  Frank   Anchor  19:07, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

What do I need to do to provide "convincing evidence?" Those are two reputable sources that quote this as a rivalry. I just don't understand how this page is harming anyone. I have enjoyed learning about this series and it is clear there is a geographic and historical dislike between these teams. I have not even had time to finish it out and show the history of this rivalry through the Notable Games section. I don't get the benefit to deleting this article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tnsc20 (talk • contribs) date (UTC)
 * Per WP:HARMLESS, this isn't an argument to keep a page. Pages on Wikipedia must meet notability, verifiability, policies and use reliable sources. I'd encourage you to read these policies, as you obviously have skill and could bring useful edits and pages! Glman99 (talk) 18:27, 22 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete, no sources meeting WP:GNG provided.
 * Please feel free to create a WP:DRAFT article and submit it to WikiProject Articles for creation instead.
 * Please also be sure to sign your comments on this page.
 * PK-WIKI (talk) 18:32, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Would you care to explain how this is not Notable (there are significant articles covering these games and results), It is also verifiable and reliable. Knoxville News, Greenville Online, and State Newspaper are all good sources, and I have added citations into the article. I feel as though this article is being targeted just because it failed in 2015, and not based on the merits of what is currently in it. I get that you disagree, but there really isn't a reason I can see that this article does not meet the standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tnsc20 (talk • contribs)
 * Sure, I can explain my analysis! The Knox News source refers to SC as Tennessee's "East divisional rival". If all divisional opponents were considered notable rivalries, we'd have quite a few pages! The Tennesseean is also referring to divisional rivals, and not past rivalry between UT-SC, but potential future divisional games. That article also does not call this game a rivalry at all, while referring to Alabama and Vanderbilt as Tennessee's rivals. The State is also WP:ROUTINE coverage of the upcoming game between "SEC rivals". These are all indicative of teams that play in the same division, not a notable football rivalry. Again, I recommend you review WP:VERIFIABILITY and WP:NOTABILITY. User:PK-WIKI is also right, you can copy this article into a WP:DRAFT and then submit it to WikiProject Articles for creation later on to get help on it. Glman99 (talk) 18:49, 22 June 2023 (UTC)


 * I really feel this is just a difference of opinion, not an argument to delete the whole page. It is not just "another divisional rivalry." In face it is one of South Carolina's biggest SEC rivalries - see Greenville Newspaper - "Still, it's odd the Gamecocks' 2024 schedule won't feature Georgia, Tennessee or Florida, a trio that ranks as arguably their biggest SEC rivals." I also just have a different take on what The State article says, it calls the series "an annual SEC rivalry dating back to 1992." That does not imply divisions, but rather the history and longevity of these two teams playing. Sure its not Alabama-Tennessee, but South Carolina cost Tennessee a chance at the national championship last year, and these games have had historical impact on both programs. I have provided reliable sources that cite this as a rivalry, and really don't understand how deleting this article helps. It does nothing but invalidate my time and work, and make me less likely to contribute to wikipedia in the future.


 * Games in this series have played significant roles in the history of the program, as TN loses to SC led to Johnny majors being replaced with Fulmer. A Tennessee win over SC helped push Spurrier out the door. A 2016 Tennessee loss cost the Vols a chance at their first chance to win the East since 2007, etc. etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tnsc20 (talk • contribs)
 * Please sign your comments User:Tnsc20. Glman99 (talk) 19:12, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

So sorry about the signing comments, I did not know that was something I needed to do, but see it now. I really do just want to say I appreciate your insight, and am happy to do whatever you think is necessary to improve this article. I would love to focus on improving it rather than deleting.Tnsc20 (talk) 20:26, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
 * You can sign by placing four tildes ( ~ ) after your post. This will automatically add your username and a date/timestamp.  Frank   Anchor  20:18, 22 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep ... I know I have probably not done this in the preferred manner, and I apologize. While I am not new to wikipedia, this process is new to me, and I did not intent to format so badly. With that said this page should be kept. Relevant news sources like the Knoxville News Sentinel, the State Newspaper, and Greenville News have dubbed this a 30+ year series a rivalry. Not only that, but the series is significant historically, as games in 2013 and 2022 ultimately disqualified both schools from advancing to the national championship/CFP. Several other games have decided the winner of the SEC East. When this deletion article started, I had not had time to add citations and expand the page to where it is now.Tnsc20 (talk) 01:03, 23 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep Passes WP:GNG with significant coverage such as Why South Carolina rivalry is so important to UT Vols, South Carolina vs. Tennessee: 10 Little Known Facts About the Southern Rivalry, Tennessee football: 10 Vols games vs. South Carolina that dramatically altered history, Tennessee-South Carolina: All-time series, Steve Spurrier has changed the South Carolina-Tennessee rivalry and South Carolina faces most lopsided point spread against Tennessee in 23 years.Alvaldi (talk) 11:25, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Please refer to the below source analysis:


 * Of the sources provided, one fan blog might have enough coverage to satisfy WP:GNG in establishing South Carolina and Tennessee as rivals. Even if that was a clear pass (which it is not), GNG requires multiple sources so this alone would not be enough.  The rest are routine coverage of the series and/or only make a passing mention of the term "rivalry" without going into any depth of why there is a rivalry (animocity between teams, fan bases, etc.).  Frank   Anchor  13:47, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this source analysis! Glman99 (talk) 14:02, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I would tend to disagree here. The first source mentioned from Knoxville News, which is not a fan blog, does describe why there is a rivalry and how it is important. Just look at the title, "why SC rivalry is so important for TN" and continues on throughout the article. The author mentions how the rise of South Carolina coincided with the fall of Tennessee in the 2000s. It mentions the ups and downs of the rivalry, and how the two programs are competing for similar recruits. Look at the quote "The SEC East isn’t big enough for both South Carolina and Tennessee to achieve great success at the same time." This article explains the rivalry and its impact on the two programs by going into how the streaks in the rivalry have played into the successes and failures at each program. Tnsc20 (talk) 14:53, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The context of the quote "The SEC East isn’t big enough for both South Carolina and Tennessee to achieve great success at the same time." also mentions that it is not big enough because of traditional powers Georgia and Florida being in the SEC East as well. It has NOTHING to do with UT and South Carolina being rivals. The title uses the term "rivalry" to manufacture hype and for no other reason.  One team rising while another team falling does not imply a rivalry (if anything, it implies there not being a rivalry due to lack of simultaneous success).  Frank   Anchor  15:02, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The quote highlights the importance of the South Carolina-Tennessee series, and how one must win the game to compete in the east. This underscores the high intensity and importance this game has on the calendar each year. The nature of one team rising when the other falls in this instance does contribute to the rivalry. There is a clear reason for animosity because as South Carolina got good, they took recruits and success and games away from Tennessee (all mentioned in the article. Another source the Saturday Down South article also highlights how to connection of Steve Spurrier contributed to the growth of the rivalry during his time at SC. "Not only has South Carolina-Tennessee become a major SEC East rivalry, but the perception has changed over the past decade. The Gamecocks have been the dominant program in recent years while the Vols have come up short." This quote shows hot it is NOT just another SEC east series. In fact it is "a major SEC East rivalry." The article 10 Vols games vs. South Carolina that dramatically altered history, also describes the importance this game has carried throughout the years and how its result has lead to major changes in both programs. Its not often that you have a rivalry that twice in the last decade has eliminated one team from national championship consideration (2013 and 2022) late in the year.Tnsc20 (talk) 15:13, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
 * You say they only make one passing mention; however, this argument should not be used to discredit the sources calling this series a rivalry. For the 4th and 6th sources, I would point to trivial coverage as a reason not to discredit. Multiple sources mentioned clearly do call the Tennessee-SC series a rivalry. Also the News Sentinel does not jsut call it a divisional rivalry, as the title of the article does not say divisional. Again I would point towards trivial here as well. Tnsc20 (talk) 01:26, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
 * For the 2nd and 3rd sources, I would point to the just a blog argument With the second source, it is not fair to claim that it was written just to "manufacture hype," as that is completely unverifiable. The 3rd source describes the importance and history of the games between the two schools and should not be discredited just because you claim it is a blog. Tnsc20 (talk) 01:24, 24 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep per Alvaldi and Tnsc20. I do not agree that there is some special heightened threshold of SIGCOV that is required for rivalry articles in contrast to other types of articles. Cbl62 (talk) 20:33, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Have you reviewed the cited sources @Cbl62? There isn't any WP:SIGCOV. Glman99 (talk) 20:49, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, I did. And I also went back and reviewed my "delete" vote when this same topic was AfD'd 7 year ago. A lot has changed since then. I respect FrankAnchor's views but the following comment is striking: "The title uses the term 'rivalry' to manufacture hype and for no other reason." I don't think it's our role at AfD to second-guess the coverage or to disqualify coverage because we believe that a reliable, independent publication had an invalid motive for the coverage. Cbl62 (talk) 21:16, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Part of the issue is that we could find any division matchups called rivalries by some source. A quick search finds articles on Tennessee and Missouri, LSU (and here), Arkansas, Ole Miss. Heck, even Ohio State-Maryland. Most of these are the same sites used for the article. All major sources are WP:ROUTINE coverage of games, not actually about the history or facts of the so-called rivalry. Glman99 (talk) 00:12, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I think they key difference here is that South Carolina and Tennessee have played 30 consecutive years. Tennessee/Ole Miss and Tennessee/Arkansas used to play annually and had a rivalry. In the very first paragraph on Tennessee/Missouri it says they have not even played 12 times. Also TN/SC are much closer geographically than any of these other schools. Also, the News Sentinel Article (which calls it a "rivalry" in the title and describes the history/facts of the series) describes the high stakes matchups in the rivalry, something clearly lacking with these other series you mentioned. Another good one to look at is https://www.totheeforeverago.org/p/south-carolina-gamecocks-2024-football-schedule which lists Georgia Florida and Tennessee as south Carolinas main "local" rivals and "measuring sticks." The fear of future pages popping up involving Tennessee and other SEC opponents is not grounds to delete this one.Tnsc20 (talk) 01:16, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The source you just linked is a blog, not a WP:RS. Glman99 (talk) 20:41, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. Provided sources are all opinion or news sources: nothing solid that covers this subject from a reliable standpoint, like a book or a website by a scholar: this is an encyclopedia, not a news aggregator.  Come back when you have something that has a strong reputation for reliability.  Nyttend (talk) 19:51, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
 * "website by a scholar"? I don't know of any sports rivalry that has coverage in a "website by a scholar". It's never been, nor should it be, the notability standard that only scholarly sources count. Coverage in news sources are perfectly acceptable provided the source is a reliable source. Cbl62 (talk) 22:11, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Completely agree with Cbl62 above. News sources are credible coverage. The coverage from reputable sources like the Knoxville News Sentinel and the State newspaper are perfectly valid. Almost zero, if any, college football rivalries have a book written about them.Tnsc20 (talk) 03:32, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
 * One or two articles mentioning the two teams as "rivals" or "SEC rivals" does not meet WP:NRIVALRY (Sports rivalries are not presumed notable). Per the general guidelines, "A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Significant coverage per analysis only 2 sources are in reliable sources and they are all WP:ROUTINE. Many of the other sources are not WP:RS and then do not count towards WP:SIGCOV. Simply being mentioned in a newspaper isn't enough to meet the standards to warrant inclusion in Wikipedia. Glman99 (talk) 23:18, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

, (govols 247 is a subset of Knoxville News Sentinel and USA Today Network),, and. Again a reminder that the original Knox News article calls the two rivals in the title and does have a history of the rivalry and describes the important games over time.Tnsc20 (talk) 22:35, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
 * More sources that complete the News sentinel article in establishing this as a rivalry.
 * "it’s odd the Gamecocks’ 2024 schedule won’t feature Georgia, Tennessee or Florida, a trio that ranks as arguably their biggest SEC rivals," "Is Tennessee and South Carolina a football rivalry? 'Yeah, I think it’s a rivalry game,' junior safety Todd Kelly Jr. said. 'South Carolina and Tennessee have gone down to the wire almost every year, even before I got here,'" "If you don’t already count Tennessee as a rival, I like that one and it would probably be my pick," "The annual game between the Gamecocks and the Tennessee Volunteers is another big rivalry." Tnsc20 (talk) 22:37, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
 * @Tnsc20 Regardless of the result of this AfD, I highly suggest you read Wikipedia's guidelines on WP:V, WP:N, and WP:ROUTINE. 1 is a reliable source, but it is WP:ROUTINE in my opinion. 2, 3, and 4 are all blogs or opinion pieces, they do not meet WP:RS. Glman99 (talk) 23:05, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Glman99, I would again point to WP:JUSTABLOG. Additionally, the govols article is part of Knoxville News sentinel and I would argue a reliable source there. I do not understand the problem with as it does everything you ask. It describes the history and importance of the rivalry and is clearly a reputable sport. It calls them rivals in the title, the article is NOT called Why South Carolina is important DIVISIONAL rivals.Tnsc20 (talk) 02:40, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:JUSTABLOG does not support these sources. "And keep in mind that while sources such as blogs aren't usually suitable for the purposes of establishing notability, they may be perfectly suitable for verifying information within an article whose notability has already been established by other means". 1-2 sources doing generally WP:ROUTINE coverage does not meet WP:GNG. Glman99 (talk) 15:33, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Again, the 247 sports source is not a blog (part of Knoxville news sentinel), and the Knox News article [5 ] is credible and not routine. Tnsc20 (talk) 15:47, 27 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:HEY, seems like enough now to satisfy GNG, at least in my eyes. IceBergYYC (talk) 05:39, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The added info is still sourced from sources that do not meet WP:RS. WP:HEY does not refer to walls of text, but substantial improvement from WP:RS. Glman99 (talk) 15:30, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:HEY does apply in this situation because when this article was nominated there were no sources at all listed. Numerous references and citations have been added since this AfD was created.Tnsc20 (talk) 15:44, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The references and citations are pretty much all WP:ROUTINE. Quality matters more than quantity in this case. Throwing references at the wall does not a well-cited article make. Glman99 (talk) 13:39, 29 June 2023 (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.