Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2007 Appalachian State vs. Michigan football game

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 Speedy Keep per WP:SNOW. No realistic possibility this discussion will close as a deletion. Newyorkbrad 20:47, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2007 Appalachian State vs. Michigan football game

Without a doubt, this was a big game with an unbelievable and notable result. And yet it doesn't deserve its own article. Wikipedia is WP:NOT a newsservice, and it doesn't hold an article on each individual important games (notable exceptions might be the Super Bowl or national championships). For example, we don't have an article for 2006 Orange Bowl. The Evil Spartan 04:45, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: we do have an article for 2006 Orange Bowl. --68.114.40.94 21:35, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If that's the case, then you ought to delete most of the articles in Category:College football games. The majority of those articles—in fact, I'd dare say a large majority—don't meet your criteria for inclusion. Wikipedia may not be a news service, but it is a place to include historically notable events. The first-ever win by a FCS team over a ranked FBS team is almost certainly going to be remembered 100 years from now, if not longer. Matter of fact, using your criteria, 2007 Fiesta Bowl, arguably the most famous single game in recent college football history, should be deleted. — Dale Arnett 04:58, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, I am going to look for deletion of some of those. The first one I came across is already up for deletion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2005 Louisville vs. West Virginia football game. The Evil Spartan 05:04, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no reason this article should be deleted. By your criteria, we would have to delete every college football game article prior to the 1998 season. Chiefmagoo 05:02, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS doesn't really apply here. In fact, I'm saying monumentally important games, meaning championships, may be worth an article. Big upsets are not. The Evil Spartan 05:04, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How is this NOT a monumental game? You might as well start deleting every sports article that doesn't deal with a championship game. Chiefmagoo 05:09, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And once again, you've come up with WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. The Evil Spartan 05:12, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would you like to put up 2007 Fiesta Bowl for deletion then? It's not a championship game, therefore it doesn't meet your criteria. — Dale Arnett 05:14, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So we should delete an article because of YOUR criteria? Do you really have nothing better to do with your time? Chiefmagoo 05:17, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stepping back a little — You've done a service, Spartan. AFAIK, the college football WikiProject has yet to set notability criteria for individual college football games. Your nomination means it's long since time to do this. — Dale Arnett 05:19, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, I think you may have a point. Sorry if I'm getting a little touchy. The Evil Spartan 05:21, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I'm really opposed to creating articles for any football game and am not just biased against this one. I really feel like WikiNews is the appropriate place for stuff like this, instead of rehashing the play-by-play from the box score on here. Since the article only has 1 contributor, moving to Wikinews should not be a problem Corpx 05:19, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Transwiki per Corpx. (Unless the college football WikiProject sets a guideline before this AfD ends). --Bfigura ^(talk) 05:24, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Some particular games are remembered for years - remember Doug Flutie beating Miami?. If this game becomes one of them, then in future years it can be added to Wikipedia. There's no rush - Wikipedia will be here if and when it happens. MarkBul 05:30, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll propose that the Wikiproject do the following:
- Establish criteria for which existing game articles actually deserve to be in the main Wikipedia.
- For games which aren't notable enough, establish which ones can be moved to WikiNews. Note that the vast majority of the games currently in the category predate WikiNews.
- For future games, and for games that have been removed from Wikipedia, establish criteria for indicating when an article is appropriate. Keep in mind that an article that may not be appropriate now might be appropriate one, five, or 10 years from now.
- This may well prevent future disputes about articles like this one. — Dale Arnett 05:32, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I just put up the proposal on the WP College Football talk page. Anyone involved in the project who wants to contribute to it, it's all yours. BTW, Spartan, I apologize too for getting a bit testy. :) — Dale Arnett 05:46, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Now that I've gotten over the initial shock and have thought about it in a little more detached manner, I actually would have no objection to a transwiki to Wikinews if that's the final decision. I've now created my own user account on Wikinews, but I don't have the experience on that site to do a transwiki. If we are going to transwiki, there are a couple of things to keep in mind:
- I don't know if Wikinews accepts Wikipedia's referencing templates. What little I saw indicates that Wikinews has somewhat different templates. Those will have to be converted.
- I seriously doubt that Wikinews can handle our infoboxes for college football games, unless those get transwikied as well. — Dale Arnett 06:58, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- - Comment It is unexpected to some, but Wikinews uses Creative Commons licensing and is not compatible with the GFDL, thus Transwiki to Wikinews is not possible. --Dhartung | Talk 09:42, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom, and Corpx. IvoShandor 11:14, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Arguably the greatest regular season upset in history of college football. Unarguably the greatest upset in the history of college football since Division I split into 2 divisions. I'd venture to say that this article is more notable and worthy of inclusion on Wikipedia than some national championship games. X96lee15 14:09, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep—Granted Wikipedia isn't a news service but this game isn't just today's news; it's history. For as long as college football exists, this game will have importance. We might not have an article on the 2006 Orange Bowl but we do have one for the 2006 Insight Bowl. Why? The Insight Bowl made history. Again, the game made history and the article is a keeper. →Wordbuilder 14:45, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep This is arguably the biggest upset in college football history. People will remember this game for a long time. I agree with X96lee15, this game is more notable than some national championship games. Cogswobble talk 15:24, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect/Merge into the 2007 Michigan Wolverines football team. Nothing is there and there is little other reason for it to exist as its own article, yet. If in x (5?) years people are still talking about this as being the "downfall of Michigan" or some event that triggers something, I can see a larger need for the article on its own. Otherwise, it could exist just fine in the other article. MECU≈talk 15:31, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I feel this game is important enough to have its own page. Sure, it's no Champonship or BCS bowl game or anything. But it is an important game in the sense that a small school with such small fundings on their football program and a stadium that boats a mere 11,000 or so capacity walks into the Big House in front of over 100,000 fans and beats the winningest program in Division I-A history. It was a monumental game and important to all the small teams out there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.124.247.185 (talk • contribs)
Keep - Notable enough for its own page. I bet in 50 years, people will still remember this game fondly as one of the biggest upsets in college football history. VegaDark (talk) 16:22, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article should stay After all, if horrific/notorious sports events like the Royals/Yankees Pine Tar Game, the Pacers/Pistons Brawl, and the Knicks/Nuggets Brawl can have their own articles on Wikipedia, then why not shining moments like this one? JoBrLa talk --JoBrLa 16:29, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep! This was historical, no doubt at all. And I don't know if Michigan fans would appreciate the only reference to it being on their team's 2007 season article (or Apalachian St. fans either, actually)... Zeng8r 16:35, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete Yes, it was shocking in some senses, but does it need it's own article, no way. Info can easily be widdled down into the respective college pages. Dannycali 16:48, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Question—Does a "Strong Delete" (or "Strong Keep" for that matter) carry more weight than a regular "Delete" and does a "Weak Delete" (or "Weak Keep") carry less weight? →Wordbuilder 18:39, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - No for strong delete/strong keep and normally yes for the weak delete and weak keep, I normally discount them as they usually never give a reason other than one that is listed in WP:ATA.
    - It doesn't count any more or less, people just use "strong" or "weak" to indicate, well, how strongly they feel about it. In other words, "weak delete" usually means, "Right now I say delete, but my mind could be changed", whereas "strong delete" usually means "I'm not going to change my mind, and I may also try to convince people to change theirs". Cogswobbletalk 19:28, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      - Thanks, Cogswobble. That makes sense. →Wordbuilder 19:36, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to 2007 Michigan Wolverines football team per MECU. Wikipedia is not a news service, if this game is still discussed a few years from now, maybe we can. Also it's not as big as an upset as people think, Appalachian State is the top Division II school in the nation and won the last two Division-II championships. Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 18:56, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It definitely is a huge upset. A FCS Division team had NEVER beaten a Top 25 FBS team, let alone a Top 5 team on the road in front of 100,000+ people that is the winningest program in college football history. X96lee15 19:10, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

concur with the last comment I'm wondering what would constitute an immediately historical moment. If aliens landed on the White House lawn, would we have to wait a few years to see if people are still talking about it before honoring the event a wikipedia article??? Zeng8r 19:27, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Concur This is without a doubt one of the most monumental upsets in college football history. To repeat, a I-AA/FCS team has NEVER beaten a ranked team, why do we have to wait a few years to see if people are talking about this? This game is certainly now a benchmark for upsets in college football. Cogswobble talk 19:37, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This is notable as the only time a D1-AA team has beaten a ranked D1-A team. It's obviously notable and will obviously be discussed for a long time. CJC47 19:34, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - A very notable event. Possibly one of the biggest upsets in NCAA football history. Therefore it is notable Dincher 20:37, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I was unsure of having an individual article for this game (and I'm an Appalachian alumnus), but the magnitude of the upset is far greater than what I could ever imagine. Thanks for creating it Dale - even if it doesn't stick around. Geologik 20:52, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This game has had repercussions that will be remembered for years. Contemporary commentators are calling it "The greatest upset in NCAA history." It deserves an article. - James_Aguilar (talk) 21:11, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think the glut of keep votes appear to be from the game still being in the public lexicon at this point, and the shockwaves are still felt. But we need to look at this from a long-term historical standpoint. Obviously, this is a big deal this weekend, but will it be to justify an article on it in the next month or year? I highly doubt it. There doesn't need to be an article on it, and wikinews is a fine place to put things, and putting the info on the athletics page of Michigan would also be more than sufficient. Dannycali 21:14, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From a long-term historical perspective, this game is arguably the biggest upset in college football history. It's also one of the biggest upsets in sports history. Next month, next year, ten years from now, people will still discuss this game any time the issue of great upsets is discussed. Cogswobble talk 23:43, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - If I had to guess, this game will go down in the history of college football one of the greatest underdog games ever. If this doesn't deserve a page, then either would such things as the The Play. Remember 21:33, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS isn't a reason for keeping an article Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 22:28, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe not, but the fact that this is arguably the biggest upset in college football history means the article belongs. Cogswobble talk 23:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep More people will remember this game than the winner of the BCS championship. --67.165.6.76 23:00, 2 September 2007 (UTC) — 67.165.6.76 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Keep This game is one of the most important in the sports history of both Michigan and App State. It will bring about serious changes for both football programs. I understand why you would think it is better off in Wikinews, but the game is historical enough to keep in Wikipedia. And I say that as a Michigan fan.--67.165.6.76 24:00, 2 September 2007 (UTC) — 67.165.6.76 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Strong Keep If in several years this game has "failed to stand the test of time", we can discuss a possible deletion. But it is illogical to delete an article in anticipation of the possible future status of its subject. The game is big news NOW. It is important NOW. It is ridiculous to suggest that it might fade from people's minds in the future - what possible evidence is there of that? Predicting the future is no basis for deletion Keep the article until it is no longer significant, and when (or if) that happens, those in favor of deletion will have a valid argument. Iowa13 16:05, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As mentioned, this is the first time in college football history that a Division 1-AA team has beaten a ranked 1-A team, thus it has notibility. Gopher backer 02:04, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, obviously. This is the biggest upset in the history of college football and arguably the biggest in all of sports. --B 02:07, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There's not much that hasn't been said already, but keep in mind that because this is the first time in history an FCS team has beaten an FBS team it is objectively and unequivocally a historic game. It is equivalent to a D-League team defeating an NBA team in a regular season game (if such a game were allowed). It is a situation without precedent that I am aware of in recent American sports history. Although it may not have the far-reaching impact of the AFL champion New York Jets defeating the NFL champion Baltimore Colts in Super Bowl III (just an example), the disparity between the divisions was significantly wider for the Appalachian State-Michigan game. This article really should be kept. -Gjmcfarland 02:47, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This game is extraordinarily significant as a game. It is not so much significant from an encyclopedic perspective. As time passes, I'm not saying that it won't remain memorable for many people, but as a Wikipedia entry it is extremely biased toward the exuberance (or disappointment) of the present. To reply to Iowa13, I agree that there is a lot of passion about the topic, but that does not prove its importance. It merely demonstrates fan rivalry (by Michigan fans, App State fans, and Michigan's rivals), which in and of itself is not proof of an encyclopedia-worthy subject. I agree that if this is a moment of significance whose importance can withstand the test of time, that it becomes worthy of inclusion. But unfortunately Wikipedia is flawed in its bias toward the present, and this is something that should be avoided. 75.83.232.97 02:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC) — 75.83.232.97 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Keep. Reliable sources such as this [1] are saying "We'll still be talking about it a few decades from now. Especially in the locker rooms of every huge underdog, where they'll say, "If Appalachian State can beat Michigan, why can't we shock the world, too?" It seems notable enough to warrant inclusion as an historic game which has certainly attracted attention in American football. Capitalistroadster 03:18, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This game will quite possibly be of more interest to encyclopedia readers than any other this year or in recent history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfwambaugh (talk • contribs) 03:51, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Going beyond the fact that it's the greatest upset in college football, this game has a number of possible ramifications. Even if UM bounces back to a respectable season, their head coach may still be fired for this game. ASU may decide to jump up to I-A based on this game. It may result in a decrease of the I-A tactic of paying off I-AA teams for a quick "tune-up" win at the start of the season. If any one of those things happen, along with others I don't mention here, this game has had a bigger impact than some previous games which have pages of their own. Cardinal2 04:03, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from original creator: I now feel really bad about opening up such a can of worms on this issue. I've now put up on the WP College Football talk page an idea for a dedicated college football wiki. I don't have the time myself for something that ambitious, but I think this may be the only way to keep disputes like this from happening again, at least in the college football context. As for this article, I've been tempted to just up and blank it myself just to end all this argument, as the original creator, but I'll let the process continue. — Dale Arnett 04:19, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply—I wouldn't feel bad. It's a good article. Regardless of what is decided here, if the article you started wasn't the catalyst, then another article would have been. We might as well hash it out and establish a consensus. →Wordbuilder 15:14, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I don't see that there is anything in policy or guidelines that says there cannot be articles about individual football games, and considering that if there are going to be any articles about any college football games, this one is certainly notable enough to warrant having an article. older ≠ wiser 14:21, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It looks well sourcd and the game is being called the greatest upset in national collegiate football history, definitly notable enough.--Joebengo 17:48, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Biggest upset in college football history deserves an article. --Fantrl 18:44, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is not just another game it has so much meaning w/ the difference between powerhouse haves and have nots.Tulsaschoolboard 21:22, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep definitely notable. ↔NMajdan•talk 02:00, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, citing Iowa13. To play devil's advocate: just because we don't have an article for every important game, it doesn't mean we shouldn't.--ProfessorFokker 02:17, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Very Strong Keep definitely notable, definitely historic a division I-AA team goes to the Big House and defeats the winningist program of all time. I know it doesn't count as an argument, but there are much less notable games on Wikipedia, so why ought this one be deleted? The scope of the game and the fact that no team will ever underestimate a team from a lower conference or division is cause for it to be kept. The fact that it's the first time in history such an event has occurred, and how shocking it is considering what everyone thinks they know about college football rankings, it ought to be kept.--Scotsworth 08:09, 4 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scotsworth (talk • contribs)
Keep Considering that this is the first time in the history of CFB that a I-AA/FCS team has beaten a ranked I-A/FBS team makes it historically significant. Even if there were only a handful of times in history that this had happened, each one would then be significant; that there has only been one makes it moreso. If this article should be deleted, then so should every article concerning historic milestones in NCAA Football. Leeharvey418 09:59, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Does anyone have a problem with a speedy/snowy keep? This thing obviously isn't going to get deleted and it's difficult to email people who have taken photographs asking them to release one under the GFDL when there's a deletion banner sitting at the top of the page. --B 14:48, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: It has been called, in consensus, "One of the greatest upsets in college football history" by all major news sources; I will provide the evidence that should hopefully end this: In addition to the AP article that is found everywhere: It made the front page of the New York Times (college football games do not do that, it's not USA TODAY), where it states Appy State "pulled off one of the biggest upsets in college football history". The LA Times: "Carr's legacy now will be as closely tied to Saturday's loss at the Big House as it will be to the 1998 Rose Bowl win over Washington State that made him Victor Valiant." From ESPN.com's Pat Forde: Remember the score: App. State 34, Michigan 32. We'll still be talking about it a few decades from now. Especially in the locker rooms of every huge underdog, where they'll say, "If Appalachian State can beat Michigan, why can't we shock the world, too?" From SI.com: Have no doubt, what the Mountaineers did Saturday in the Big House was a watershed moment for FCS teams and one of the biggest upsets in the game's history. The only exceptional thing is that it happened so hot on the heels of the Boise State Fiesta Bowl. This is why I regret leaving Wikipedia to go to games, I am away for a while and see things like this! I hope my argument and evidence will convince others. --Bobak 17:34, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Although I agree with the nominator that, in general, it takes a lot to demonstrate notability for a particular football game, I believe this game passes that threshold. It has been consistently called the greatest upset in college football history, and removing the inevitable orgy of hyperbole, it was an upset of monumentous proportions, worthy of a wiki article, albeit barely. Avi 20:41, 4 September 2007 (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.