Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black and Blue Bowl

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 delete both. Neil ム 11:44, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Black and Blue Bowl

nn college football rivalry, no sources that indicate why this rivalry is important, Delete Jaranda wat's sup 19:15, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

  • Adding Battle for the Bones as well for the same reason as above and that playing several games doesn't indicate a rivalry. Jaranda wat's sup 19:19, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Black and Blue Bowl, strong keep Battle for the Bones. I think Battle for the Bones is one of the better-looking rivalry articles; it is sourced, hence the strong keep. My only issue with Black and Blue Bowl is that it cites no sources, but that can be fixed. Since there was no tag indicating the lack of sources, I say let the article stand. —C.Fred (talk) 19:33, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
  • The issue that is the sources are the home pages of the football teams and battleofthebones.com which isn't reliable. Jaranda wat's sup 19:35, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
    • Just checked google, nothing reliable at all for Battle for the Bones (only 29 direct google hits, not including duplicates, mainly the battleofthebones website, a college newspaper and wikipedia). There is a cheat to get the Black and Blue Bowl for NCAA Football 08, but I can't find more info on the rivalry, again little in google to work with. WP:V is a issue. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 19:44, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
      • USA Today article: [1]. —C.Fred (talk) 19:54, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
      • That's a one liner very trivial mention, doesn't indicate why the rivalry is important. Jaranda wat's sup 19:56, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
        • It certainly establishes that it's a named rivalry with a trophy. —C.Fred (talk) 20:01, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
        • It still has WP:V concerns, one source doesn't indicate an article intantly Jaranda wat's sup 18:35, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Redistribute any useful information on relevant articles either for the universities or sports teams themselves. I think rivalry articles are extremely dubious, as the extent of rivalry is often highly subjective and opinionated. The oxford-cambridge boat race is an example of a suitable university rivalry, this I do not think qualifies by comparison. Its effectively just a list of game outcomes, minimal encylopedic use and questionable noteability. WikipedianProlific(Talk) 20:06, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment There are many such yearly rivalries in American college football, many going back 100 years. It would certainly be easy to get references for Army-Navy and Michigan-Ohio State that would satisfy Wikipedia notability requirements. The problem is when you get down to minor programs and shorter rivalries. MarkBul 21:54, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
    • Which was my point with the Black and Blue Bowl. There ought to be sources out there. I'd have preferred longer than a week to find them. —C.Fred (talk) 22:01, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 02:45, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mackensen (talk) 14:17, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge one, delete the other On Black & Blue, it's a long rivalry, but doesn't this look like a fake trophy (http://home.earthlink.net/~sparkomemphis/black.and.blue.bowl.html)? It's on an "unofficial" website. On the official sites, "Black and Blue" seems to get more mention on the Mississippi side than on the Memphis side, but not much at that. The other one has only a few googlehits, and may be like the "roosterbowl.com" article that got plucked last month. Mandsford 13:42, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete both - Black and Blue fails WP:V with no sources despite the extra time to add them to the article. Bones has a single source to show that the name exists but, as the source states, this is a new trophy with no history behind it. The core facts can be added to the teams articles as a post-AfD editorial action. TerriersFan 02:23, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Neutral on Black and Blue Bowl, delete Battle for the Bones. Two years does not a rivalry game make. Caknuck 04:41, 17 September 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.