Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Southampton F.C. 0–9 Leicester City 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 keep. Per WP:SNOW Fenix down (talk) 07:44, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Southampton F.C. 0–9 Leicester City F.C.

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This isn't a cup final and other than a high scoring game we don't have articles for single game events like this. This previous AfD was deleted because of such issues. Govvy (talk) 10:25, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Also this Man City 8-0 Watford AfD. Govvy (talk) 11:07, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

No, the fact is this is the biggest ever premier league away win, Nottingham Forest F.C. 1–8 Manchester United F.C. the previous record away win has a wiki page and so does the record ever premier league win Manchester United F.C. 9–0 Ipswich Town F.C., and also in your argument this is just a high scoring game you fail to realise that the highest scoring premier league game Portsmouth F.C. 7–4 Reading F.C. also has a wikipedia page Vaacif (talk) 11:49, 26 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Govvy (talk) 10:27, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:58, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:58, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:58, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:59, 26 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Meh hard to get excited about either keeping or deleting this one, but the fact the Nottingham-Man U game has an article probably means this one will be notable enough in time. SportingFlyer  T · C  12:56, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable, especially as it is recorded by a team which not usually inside the top four/six. Flix11 (talk) 14:35, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - equalled or broke multiple records in English football, clearly a notable game -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:53, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - Definitely a notable record-breaking game and as stated before other similar games have pages. Aelimian21 (talk) 18:36, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Chris. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 21:46, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep There's Liverpool 9–0 Crystal Palace (1989) on here, too. Scherben808 (talk) 22:40, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep for the above reasons Italia2006 (talk) 22:55, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP:NSPORTSEVENT suggests the sort of individual game that might be independently notable: "A game that is widely considered by independent reliable sources to be notable, outside routine coverage of each game, especially if the game received front page coverage outside of the local areas involved (e.g. Pacers–Pistons brawl, 2009 Republic of Ireland v France football matches, or the Blood in the Water match)". Coverage of this match appears to be WP:ROUTINE in nature, with no evidence yet of any WP:LASTING significance, and is certainly far below the amount of coverage received by the example notable games. Lowercaserho (talk) 23:53, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Now that I have more time, I'd like to dive a bit deeper into what constitutes routine coverage of a Premier League game. I'll be analysing coverage on Sky Sports and BBC Sport, since they are the two best sources currently on the article (ie, not local and not primary). For this match, I was able to find three article on the Sky Sports website and four on the BBC Sport website . For comparison, I considered this weekend's Chelsea vs Burnley game (chosen since it was the same weekend as Southampton vs Leicester and Chelsea were level on points with Leicester in the current table) and last weekend's Manchester Utd vs Liverpool game (chosen specifically as a game that would draw more media attention). For Chelsea vs Burnley, I found two articles on the BBC ( and two on Sky . For Manchester Utd. vs Liverpool, I found six articles on the BBC  and four on Sky . In short, the amount of routine coverage that a single match receives does vary, but the coverage given to Southampton vs Leicester was well within the range of what is routine. I find the WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and WP:ITSNOTABLE arguments put forward in favour of keeping this article to be deeply unconvincing. Lowercaserho (talk) 11:44, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I think the difference is this game generated heaps coverage elsewhere - while BBC may not have spent more time on it than you might expect, the game itself is going to show up in articles like these for a long time. SportingFlyer  T · C  12:09, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * That article has exactly one sentence that's actually about this game, which I would hardly count as the significant coverage required for notability. It demonstrates that high scoring premier league games are collectively notable (which we already have that covered at list of Premier League highest scoring games) but not the individual notability of this one specific game. Lowercaserho (talk) 13:45, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not using that as a source to show this match is credible, but rather to demonstrate how it will be discussed/referenced in the future. SportingFlyer  T · C  13:48, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * That's my problem with these articles, it's one game, the coverage is generally WP:ROUTINE then at the moment, it's very weak on WP:GNG. They should be combined into an article that covers a few events of this nature, not one! Govvy (talk) 15:03, 27 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep Considering that the match is a record in English football, and that there are other far less notable matches that exist. I honestly would've kept the "Man City 8-0 Watford" match if Man City scored 9 or 10 goals rather than 8, automatically making that article fail WP:GNG as there have been many other EPL matches were a team won by 8 goals or more. KingSkyLord (talk &#124; contribs) 03:31, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - This game is notable for being the biggest away win in English top-flight history, as well as the fact that other similar games have pages here on Wikipedia as well. Ultra  Blazer   04:02, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep per the comments made above. Ben5218 (talk) 06:56, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. If we delete this article, by the same standard we'll have to delete this, this, and this too; or even Barcelona 6–1 Paris Saint-Germain. --Portalian (talk) 08:49, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep As the match broke many long-standing records.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 13:42, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Given that this match broke a PL record for an away win this is surely notable and worth keeping? As others have mentioned, there are existing articles for record-breaking PL games as well. Joelson98 (talk) 16:39, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep If it is just a Premier League record I don't think it is worthy to create a new article but, it is the record of English football of all-time when the record is create, so just keep. KyleRGiggs (talk) 17:13, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep Obviously notable, record-breaking match that has generated and will continue to generate significant coverage. I suggest a WP:SNOW closure at this point so we don't waste any more time. Smartyllama (talk) 17:14, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - Lowercaserho's argument does hold some weight, but because of the records this match broke and the coverage it received for me propels it past what is considered routine coverage of Premier League games. Inter&#38;anthro (talk) 01:06, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - This is notable in a way that it broke records for English football but like Lowercaserho has said, most of the sources so far has been routine and none that is outside of the norm for this match. For it to last, it's needs to last the test of the time for this match to be notable which I reckon might be the case. HawkAussie (talk) 02:57, 28 October 2019 (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.