Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Bucks–Bulls rivalry

Vote delete, but ....
I've voted "weak delete" on this because despite what Bleacher Report may say, there was (still is) a real sense of a "rivalry" (not sure if that's the correct term) between people living in Wisconsin and people living in Illinois (Chicago) and this naturally extends to professional sports. Back in the 70s and 80s, the Bulls and Bucks were considered serious rivals by many fans and players of both teams, just like the White Sox and Brewers, and Bears and Packers. I am not, however, sure if the same fervor exists today for anything other than Bears-Packers. Large numbers of Bulls fans do still travel to Milwaukee for road games against the Bucks (often outnumbering Bucks' fans) and if you listen to the radio and TV broadcasts of such games, the announcers from both sides still do consider it to be quite a rivalry. The question is, how do you sufficiently source something like that? - Marchjuly (talk) 02:33, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Unless there's significant coverage that is verifiable, there is not much that can be done. Fans making a relatively short road trip to see their team doesnt always translate to articles with enough sources to write about.—Bagumba (talk) 03:53, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * @Bagumba:  I agree. As rivalries go, it's definitely not really notable outside of those cities, and doesn't even come close to other sports rivalries such as Yankees-Red Sox rivalry, Celtics-Lakers rivalry, Bears-Packers rivalry or even Blackhawks-Red Wings rivalry. If it could be saved at all, even as a stub, then it would have to be greatly improved. Is there a pressing need to delete right now? The notability template was only added (by you) a few days ago (March 1, 2014). Maybe let the article sit as is for a month or so to see if anybody tries to improve it. It seems a little strange, at least to me, to add a template requesting notability be established only then nominate the article for deletion after only one day. - Marchjuly (talk) 04:24, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I wasn't planning to investigate it when I initially tagged it. However, as things work on WP, I did end up coming across this article again and Googled and found nothing substantial.  We have at least a week to find sources, so there definitely is time.  At any rate, it's up to consensus.—Bagumba (talk) 04:30, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * @Bagumba:  Sorry, I'm still fairly new to Wikipedia, so I didn't know the "1-week" thing. I tried googling too, and found this, this,this and this. Now I don't know if any of those are good enough to satisfy WP:RS, especially for stand-alone status. Could they possibly be good enough to leave it in as part of Milwaukee Bucks vs. Chicago Bulls in the article on NBA rivalries? - Marchjuly (talk) 04:49, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * At first glance, those sources don't seem WP:RELIABLE. Others here can chime in, and you could also post a query at Reliable sources/Noticeboard.—Bagumba (talk) 04:54, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

I also found one more, maybe? As I posted above, this rivalry may just matter to Bulls and Bucks fans (i.e., Chicagoans and Wisconsinites), if it matters to anybody at all. So, it's probably going be to difficult establish any kind of notability beyond that narrow scope. That is why my vote is still "weak delete." I am only concerned (perhaps incorrectly) that deleting here means removing all mentions elsewhere. Does deletion here also mean deletion of the part about this rivalry in the "NBA rivalries" article? - Marchjuly (talk) 05:22, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * IMO, "rivalry" is an over-used term in the media. However, if multiple sources describe to some extent the history of the "rivalry" as opposed to just a trivial mention of the word, it's more likely to be a notable rivalry.  Content in an article is governed by WP:NOTEWORTHY.  It is separate from whether is topic is notable enough for a standalone article per WP:GNG.  Note that WP:AVOIDSPLIT generally advises that topics are developed before they are split out into their own articles.  Hope that helps.—Bagumba (talk) 05:38, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, that was very helpful. Thank you. Obviously, this isn't Yankees-Red Sox or anything like that. I'm pretty sure we're not going to find any books written exclusively about the Bucks-Bulls rivalry. What if, on the other hand, a writer (or writers) for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel or Chicago Tribune or other local print media could be shown to use expressions such as in "I-94 rivalry" or "long-time rivals" or even "historical rivals" when talking about the teams? Would such mentions be sufficient enough to satisfy notability or would that be considered biased? Just playing devil's advocate (WP:WFTE), not trying to be a PITA.- Marchjuly (talk) 06:07, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * GNG says "There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected." Although WP tries to make notability objective, it still has subjective elements. I usually expect three sources of significant coverage, four is a no-brainer.—Bagumba (talk) 18:22, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
 * OK. I'm still trying to find something better that what I've come up with so far, but still no luck. Unfortunately, I think such mentions only tend show up when the teams play each other and the next time they do will be April 4. - Marchjuly (talk) 04:58, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I did find a graph, but not a lot of text to go with it and certainly nothing in great detail. Plus, SB Nation is a blog site so I'm not sure if that counts for much. -Marchjuly (talk) 05:38, 6 March 2014 (UTC)