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 article's claim of significance was that the game was the largest 4th-quarter comeback in Texas football history. This does not strike me as significant enough to warrant its own article. The sources are all
WP:ROUTINE. Also,
the article's creator states it was created to reduce the size of another article. The necessity of that is debatable; I'd say this article is an unnecessary fork, and its contents can easily be summarized on the 2007 Texas football article.
Lizard (
talk)
02:08, 3 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete Our long-standing precedent and practice is to avoid stand-alone articles about individual sports matches except in the most unusual/historic cases. All individual sport matches tend to attract significant media coverage, as this one did, in the local and sport-focused media. But I see nothing to override the principal that we avoid articles of this nature.
AusLondonder (
talk)
18:57, 10 April 2017 (UTC)reply
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.
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 article's claim of significance was that the game was the largest 4th-quarter comeback in Texas football history. This does not strike me as significant enough to warrant its own article. The sources are all
WP:ROUTINE. Also,
the article's creator states it was created to reduce the size of another article. The necessity of that is debatable; I'd say this article is an unnecessary fork, and its contents can easily be summarized on the 2007 Texas football article.
Lizard (
talk)
02:08, 3 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete Our long-standing precedent and practice is to avoid stand-alone articles about individual sports matches except in the most unusual/historic cases. All individual sport matches tend to attract significant media coverage, as this one did, in the local and sport-focused media. But I see nothing to override the principal that we avoid articles of this nature.
AusLondonder (
talk)
18:57, 10 April 2017 (UTC)reply
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.