Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Battle for the Butter


 * 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   merge to  Mike and Mike in the Morning . clear consensus for merge  DGG ( talk ) 03:55, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

The Battle for the Butter

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Mildly amusing retelling of a non-notable sporting fixture given an amusing(?) name thanks to the amusing(?) ramblings of a couple of minor presenters. Not a great event like, say the 1966 Cup Final or the 2011 Super Bowl. Does this belong anywhere in an encyclopaedia? Emeraude (talk) 17:41, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 12:24, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 12:24, 21 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect to Mike and Mike in the Morning. The game itself is not notable. The theme might be notable. — X96lee15 (talk) 13:13, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect per X96lee15. cmadler (talk) 13:59, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep: Though humorous, subject meets WP:GNG.  I could accept a merge as long as we don't obliterate all the content.--Milowent • hasspoken  20:21, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per national exposure and response that the game received. Jrcla2 (talk) 19:34, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, → B  music  ian  00:09, 27 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep per, , , the subject appears to meet WP:GNG. Northamerica1000(talk) 21:35, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. Please review what WP:GNG actually says.  Of the three articles cited above, the first is a pre-game discussion of the "Battle for the Butter" name bestowed by the ESPN radio jocks (not the actual game itself), the second article was published in the on-line Stony Brook student newspaper and therefore does not qualify as an independent source per WP:GNG and cannot be used to support the game's notability, and the third article includes a trivial mention of the game and hardly qualifies as a meaningful source for determining notability.  If these are the best available sources, the article should be simply deleted.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 18:53, 29 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge to Mike and Mike in the Morning – After consideration, changed my !vote here to merge. (Sidenote: I'm well aware of the prose at WP:GNG, hence the initial "weak keep" !vote). Also, per WP:PRESERVE an actual merging of the verified information should occur, not just a "merge" that actually just ends up as a redirect without any of the information specifically/selectively merged. Northamerica1000(talk) 08:04, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Based on coverage found by clicking Google news archive link at the top of the AFD.  D r e a m Focus  21:54, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirect: Just because a few sources mention it doesn't mean we have to have a whole article about it p  b  p  04:21, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect. Seriously?  Six weeks ago, we were having a heated notability debate whether to keep a well-sourced article about a recent Michigan-Notre Dame game that we ultimately decided to delete, by a roughly  4–1 margin, because the UM-ND game had little lasting historical significance and little continuing media coverage of a meaningful nature per WP:NEVENT.  This "Battle of the Butter" game in no way qualifies for a presumption of notability under the more specific game notability guidelines of WP:SPORTSEVENT, nor does it appear to satisfy the applicable guidelines of WP:NEVENT.  In short, there is no reason why this relatively meaningless regular season Division I FCS college football game should have a stand-alone article.  That it presently exists is a testament to inconsistently applied notability standards.  I strongly urge everyone who has participated in this discussion so far to review the discussion at Articles for deletion/2011 Michigan vs. Notre Dame football game, as well as the event notability guidelines of WP:NEVENT, and then focus their comments on the applicable notability standards.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 18:36, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Some random midwest United States American football matchup that seems to have gotten no coverage compared to the Battle for the Butter's nationwide coverage seems a bad comparison.--Milowent • hasspoken 05:32, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * A Notre Dame - Michigan college football game is not a "random" college football matchup. It was a game with two of the biggest and most historically significant squads in college football, and got way more coverage than this clearly random college football matchup. This game only got some coverage because of a joke by some journalists and the coverage died off after a few days. It's like comparing apples and oranges here. Secret account 19:29, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Secret, I'm pretty sure that Milowent was making a joke. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 21:02, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect per Dirtlawyer. Cbl62 (talk) 21:40, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect, also per Dirty Dirt.--GrapedApe (talk) 21:47, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect per Dirtlawyer who nailed it right on, and my reply to Milowent. I'll do the merge if needed. Secret account 19:29, 30 May 2012 (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.