Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michigan State Miracle

Add links
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 redirect to Michigan–Michigan State football rivalry. (non-admin closure) HalloweenNight (talk) 16:31, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Michigan State Miracle

[edit]
Michigan State Miracle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
2015 Michigan State vs Michigan football game (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTNEWS, basically.

Indidual College football plays (or the games they were in) can be notable:

and so on.

This may become one of them. It certainly has plenty of media coverage at present. But it is too soon to for that to be verified. Shirt58 (talk) 09:41, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please note Part of Shirt58's argument is that this article was created "too soon" to be considered notable, however he has also included the Kick Six page in his argument for deletion. The Kick Six article was created on December 2nd, 2013, exactly 2 days after that event occurred. Thanks! Stubbleboy 04:56, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has bee n included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  11:30, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  11:30, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  11:30, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for now or redirect to 2015 Michigan State Spartans football team#Michigan. This article was created about 6 hours after the game ended. College football games are dealt with appropriately in season articles on the teams involved. Individual college games only warrant stand-alone articles if they are shown, through the test of time, to be historically significant to the sport. It is simply TOOSOON to determine whether this game will achieve that level of significance. Cbl62 (talk) 14:55, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I am the creator of the article. I have been a longtime Wikipedia member, and I plan on improving the article even further. Why so quick to delete? To say that this play isn't relevant and unworthy of its own page is rather obtuse in my opinion. The chances of the opponent winning this game on the last play were .02%. This is a long time rivalry (See: Michigan–Michigan State football rivalry) and coach Jim Harbaugh's first season as Michigan's head coach. With this loss, he became the 7th Michigan coach in a row to lose to Michigan State their first year. Michigan had combined to defeat its past three opponents by a score of 97-0, and were actually favored by 6 1/2 points at kickoff. This is also noteworthy considering Michigan State at the time was undefeated (6-0) and ranked 7th in the country while Michigan (5-1) had already lost a non-conference game (Utah, 6-0, #4 in country as of kickoff) and was ranked 12th. I appreciate having the opportunity to make my case and share this information with everyone, and no hard feelings if the consensus reached is delete. I am a little surprised though, considering it is obvious this play will be talked about for many years to come. Thanks! Stubbleboy 16:29, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Michigan–Michigan State football rivalry per Cake and others involved in this discussion. The only way the page itself would be substantially relevant, is if Michigan State were to move forward undefeated, and then moved on to win the College Football Playoff National Championship. Currently they are tied for 6th with Clemson at 12-1 odds according to vegasinsider.com. I, Stubbleboy the creator of this article have struck my 'keep' !vote and concede that I agree with others to Redirect for now per WP:TOOSOON and WP:NOTNEWS. Thanks! Stubbleboy 07:49, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This article is terribly written, and needs a substantial rewrite. I am not advocating for or against its deletion, though I will say that a better redirect target would be Michigan–Michigan State football rivalry#2010s. Primefac (talk) 17:41, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Response: Primfac, I appreciate you assisting by editing the article, and for your participation in this discussion. However, calling the article that I have spent time on creating and editing terribly written is hardly productive or politically correct. For obvious reasons, your comment could very well hurt someone's feelings if they were more sensitive then myself. I suggest that you take time to review the policy Wikipedia:Be kind and in the future please consider taking a different approach with any criticism. If you read my previous comment, you can very well see that I stated I planned on improving the article even further. Don't be a jerk. Thanks! Stubbleboy 18:24, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You are correct, I was too harsh in my criticism of the article. My apologies. Primefac (talk) 18:26, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I accept and appreciate your apology. Thanks. Stubbleboy 18:49, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Since this AFD is about the subject itself (and not the specific article) I have added it to the discussion. Primefac (talk) 18:29, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Can't we just combine any helpful information from the 2015 Michigan State vs Michigan football game page into the Michigan State Miracle page then Redirect? Stubbleboy 18:57, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep A significant event in a significant sport. Considering the length and depth of this historic rivalry, I don't think it takes a crystal ball to see that there will soon be more RS discussions of this event than anyone can reasonably endure. SteveStrummer (talk) 19:42, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the article on the game - The game's entire notability is for it's role in the rivalry -- better covered in the rivalry article -- and for this single play. Delete the article on the play without prejudice toward recreation if adequate sources to demonstrate notability can be found later. I think there will be such sources, but it may be too soon to say. cmadler (talk) 20:11, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I agree with the recommendation to either redirect to Michigan–Michigan State football rivalry or userfy, until the play's individual notability (or the game's significance for the season) can be properly defended with external citations. This may very well become a notable play, soon or by December. jFiander (talk) 20:38, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Historically, this event was the first of it's kind. Never has a leading team's punt been blocked in the final seconds, recovered by the opposing team, then ran back for the game winning touchdown as the clock expired. We have an article for the Kick Six event during the 78th Iron Bowl (also a rivalry) which has a section for Coaches and Players, A game recap, and even a Scoring summary. How are any of those sections relevant to the event that happened? Here is your answer, they aren't, and this article could easily include such filler. I'm actually starting to wonder had I have just waited and done all the work myself before creating the article if there would have even been a need for a deletion discussion. There will eventually be a Wikipedia article on this historic event, so I'm not sure why deleting it now would be productive. Stubbleboy 20:51, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - There is nothing historically significant about this game, and of course leading teams have lost in the final seconds of games before, including the circumstances described. And, as far as I am concerned, someone can nominate "Kick Six" for AfD, too. If Wikipedia editors have to invent a cutesy title for the game or borrow one from fan blogs, that's usually a sign that the game probably does not meet our criteria for a stand-alone article. Merely being an exciting game is not enough; there are hundreds of exciting CFB games every season, and dozens are decided in the closing seconds. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 05:09, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment You're entitled to your own opinion, however you would have to go back and delete TONS of articles if this event isn't significant to warrant it's own. What about this one 2006 Michigan State vs. Northwestern football game? Does it meet your personal criteria of being a valid and worthy article? What about the 2015 MLL All-Star Game? That's the 2015 Major League Lacrosse All-Star Game. What now, you've never heard of it? Big surprise, neither have I. Maybe someone should get busy creating the article for the 2013 MLL Game, because I'm sure it carries just as much notably as 2015 did, right? Stubbleboy 05:57, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Yes, I am entitled to my own opinion, but what you're missing in this discussion is that my "opinion" is backed by a sound understanding of WP:GNG, WP:NRIVALRY, WP:NEVENT, WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE and WP:NOTNEWS, as well as several years of AfD precedents in discussions regarding stand-alone articles about regular season CFB games. You're late to the table, and you haven't done your homework. Again, it's not a coincidence that almost all of the long-time CFB and college sports editors are telling you the same thing. You would do well to heed those "opinions" because they are based on understanding of the relevant guidelines and precedents. Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:45, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Response Dirtlawyer1, I'd like to make you aware that in my opinion, your previous comment sounds rude, egotistical, and personal. I suggest you review the policy Wikipedia:No personal attacks before making future statements such as "you are late to the table", and "you haven't done your homework". They aren't appropriate, and could very well hurt someone else's feelings. I'm sorry you feel such a sense of entitlement, and that your opinion carries so much more weight then other's because of all of your involvement on this project. There are plenty of other KEEP !votes in this discussion, so quit trying to be such a Know it all. Just because you claim to be a lawyer (and ironically one with WAY too much free time on his hands), and like to show off all of your PRIDEFUL little stars and ribbons on your user page, it means nothing in REAL LIFE pal! Thanks, DIRT! It's okay to call you DIRT, right? Stubbleboy 04:34, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Stubbleboy, both of these pages are up for deletion. A merge request at this point is useless if they both get deleted/redirected. Primefac (talk) 00:20, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Does this really even have a name though, have sources called it the "Michigan State Miracle". Wikipedia can't create the name itself or people in the future will think it was actually called that. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 02:15, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Originally, the Kick Six article was coined Kick Bama Kick. Michigan head coach Mark Dantonio stated the name of the play was "Rangers: Mission 4-10", in the same article that is entitled "Mark Dantonio gave Michigan State's miracle play a name." Stubbleboy 05:09, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment But yet the Kick Six article was created 2 days after the Iron Bowl and we never questioned it's relevance? Stubbleboy 05:19, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Per Bagumba's rationale immediately above. WikiProject College Football has evolved a very high standard for a stand-alone article about an individual regular season game, i.e., the game must have significance to the history, culture and lore of college football, the coverage must exceed routine post-game coverage that all modern Division I FBS games receive on the Sunday and Monday after the game is played per WP:ROUTINE, and the coverage must be continuing over time per WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE and WP:NOTNEWS. We are an encyclopedia, not a sports magazine or alamanc. And we do provide an alternative venue for coverage of individual regular season games in the format of our individual team season articles, e.g., 2015 Michigan Wolverines football team and 2015 Michigan State Spartans football team. Any non-duplicate content that should be merged to those two season articles (with proper attribution, if copy-pasted). Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 04:57, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This article 2006 Michigan State vs. Northwestern football game was created 1 week after it occurred. It highlights the biggest college football comeback in NCAA Division 1-A history. The odds of Michigan State coming back to win that game were .03%, which were even greater odds then the result of this game. Stubbleboy 05:25, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - @Stubbleboy: "This article 2006 Michigan State vs. Northwestern football game was created 1 week after it occurred. It highlights the biggest college football comeback in NCAA Division 1-A history." EXACTLY: the largest comeback in the history of major college football, a tangible record that was widely commented on at the time and appears in the records books and CFB media and literature since then. Big difference. Quoting made-up probabilities and the excitement generated are irrelevant. This about WP:GNG, WP:ROUTINE, WP:TOOSOON, and the available alternatives to cover this game until WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE can be established. As for "Kick Six," please feel free to nominate it, too; it probably ought to be folded into the Iron Bowl rivalry article. Please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. It's not a coincidence that virtually all of the long-time CFB and college sports editors involved in this discussion are saying the same thing. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:37, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment TO THE AFD CLOSER, I nominate that Dirtlawyer's !vote be struck, due to his personal attack referenced above. Thanks! Stubbleboy 04:55, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Merge is a possible outcome of any AfD, so I think it saves the overhead by just continuing with the discussion here, instead of closing, and rehashing similar discussion. Moreover, there are !votes to delete both articles (they are both in this nomination)—Bagumba (talk) 18:36, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This play (and game) is one of the biggest come-from-behind victories in college football and it is easy to find sources that prove its notability. [1][2][3] None of these sources are "routine coverage" and it seems like this has moved from a routine football game into the national headlines. I would agree that more detail would need to be added and the article might need to be renamed. Natg 19 (talk) 19:18, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: All of those are routine coverage. Routine coverage is defined as "routine news coverage of such things as announcements, sports, and tabloid journalism are not sufficient basis for an article." – and those clearly fall into a cross between sports coverage and tabloid journalism. Aspirex (talk) 06:51, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge I agree with much of what's been said already about these two articles. At this point, I think that merging the two articles into one about the game itself is the simplest way forward. The play itself doesn't have a name that I know of but is quickly becoming quite notable. Making the article about the game solves this problem and leaves room for a future article about the play to be created in the future. Adam Kriesberg (talk) 20:10, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Is your !vote a "keep" vote then? Most of the editors above want to delete both the articles, as they believe this game (and play) is non-notable. Natg 19 (talk) 23:51, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to 2015 Michigan State Spartans football team. Personally, I think that, like the Kick Six, this game is actually a prime possible candidate for a individual game article in the future. But, 48 hours after the game is simply WP:TOOSOON to even approximate a guess as to whether or not this game is going to have the sort of long-term effect or lasting notability it would need to sustain an individual game article. Let's wait at least 6 months, and revisit this at a later date. For right now, let's simply cover it in the context of the 2015 Michigan & Michigan State season articles, and monitor the situation for further developments. Ejgreen77 (talk) 00:52, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Shirt58, I need you to nominate Kick Six for violating NPA. And I'm going to block you for mentioning it in the first place. Drmies (talk) 01:01, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies, are you sure you have the right discussion? What does the Kick Six article have to do with this AFD exactly, and who is Shirt58? Stubbleboy 02:39, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Look up at the nomination. Drmies (talk) 14:14, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to an anchor point in Michigan–Michigan State Rivalry#Notable games and reproduce content in the individual team season pages. As Dirtlawyer says, at the moment it's just a wild play in the news, and WP:NOTNEWS covers this; we can't be making new articles every time there is a highlight reel finish. I would say that merging is the right option for two reasons: because the play will be notable in the context of the teams' rivalry, but cannot be said to be stand-alone notable, and; because there is no extra context or aftermath of note to bring the extent of the article beyond a single paragraph describing the play (cf. the 2013 Iron Bowl, which had immediate championship implications, etc.). Aspirex (talk) 06:36, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The Kick Six page was created days after the actual event, and it got the same amount of coverage this game is getting. I don't think it's too soon to determine whether or not it's notable. ~jcm (talk) 03:49, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment NFL.COM is now stating they believe the play may very well end up "the greatest college football play of all time." Stubbleboy 16:32, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete memorable but not notable by encyclopedic standards. Doczilla @SUPERHEROLOGIST 08:27, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Michigan Michigan State football rivalry Regardless of how significant this game is in the UM-MSU rivalry is irrelevant towards the notability of this game for the purposes of its own article. This may become an important game in the history of college football and if it does then I would be happy to vote for this articles inclusion. But I doubt know how notable this game is by Wikipedia standards at this point. And, enough with the "Kick Six" argument that is simply Wikipedia:Other stuff. That game had immediate national championship implications. I would compare this incident to how we don't have a game for the Roy "Superman" Williams' game against Texas in 2001.UCO2009bluejay (talk) 06:24, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment UCO2009bluejay this is a discussion, not a vote. Wikipedia is not a democracy and polling is not a substitute for discussion. Remember that while an AFD may look like a voting process, it does not operate like one. Thanks! Stubbleboy 16:09, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Stubbleboy, UCO2009bluejay has given a good explanation for their !vote, in what I would consider to be a well-worded opinion on the matter in order to further the discussion. It is AFD policy to bold your choice (keep, merge, delete, etc), so including that in their decision is not "just a vote." Primefac (talk) 16:23, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
When did I say he didn't have a good explanation? I was only trying to be helpful. He stated "I would be happy to vote for this articles inclusion", not "!vote", so I wasn't sure if he was aware of the policy. He could be new here for all I know. Thanks! Stubbleboy 03:31, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge/redirect to the Michigan–Michigan State football rivalry section Notable games. I specifically bolded merge and not redirect because there are some good citations in this article that should be moved over to that section. Only redirecting to that section would be a disservice to the effort put into this article. Spidey104 18:23, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment surely the "Kick Six" is different in that it was the final game of the regular season and against the two-time defending champion. As great of a game it was, one is not nearly as sure of the national implications quite yet. Here's hoping it keeps Michigan hungry for the Buckeyes. Cake (talk) 14:51, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You know @MisterCake:, you may just be right. As you can see, I have been trying to make as strong of a case as I can by responding to the majority of objections, I must also concede that your note does make sense. If Michigan State were to go on and defeat an unbeaten Ohio State, then won the Big Ten Conference Championship (Over who looks to be Iowa at the moment), then I'd say they have a very strong case for inclusion in the College Football Playoffs (having beaten what will mostly be two highly ranked opponents). Finally, if MS was to win both the Semi-Final and Championship, then clearly this article should exist without objection. Agreed? Stubbleboy 07:49, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The level of coverage in reliable sources should dictate if this article should exist now or in the future, not just because MSU theoretically won the national championship. — X96lee15 (talk) 15:02, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What x96 said. If it becomes a play which proves decisive for the Big Ten title, then I imagine it will get significant coverage, but the coverage is what dictates the article's passing GNG, not merely saying the conditions are in place for it. Otherwise BYU-Nebraska's hail mary and many other needless articles get created. Cake (talk) 16:34, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment One week later (10/24), ESPN has now released a new version of the original video including previously unseen reactions from those who took part in this historic play. Ironically enough, the article is entitled "The Michigan State miracle". Stubbleboy 03:44, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @DangerDogWest:, would you mind explaining your rational for a "strong delete?" Are we to assume the other article you speak of is the 2015 Michigan State vs Michigan football game? If so, how is it this a "contentious" subject? I find it rather odd that someone would recommend "strongly" deleting an article of what is arguably the greatest play of all time in the history of college football. Stubbleboy 17:28, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Comment/Note to Closer The article has now been updated to read "the Michigan State Miracle is the nickname given to what is arguably the greatest play of all time in the history of college football." If we have other articles pertaining to certain football plays on Wikipedia, why would we exclude this one? A valid explanation from anyone participating in this discussion would be welcomed. Thanks! Stubbleboy 17:50, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Canvassing

[edit]

Comment: the creator of this article, Stubbleboy, has left notifications on the talk pages of about 40 Wikipedia editors that he has identified to be Michigan State alumni, soliciting comment here. It appears he made no effort to similarly solicit feedback from Michigan alumni or other editors with a general interest in college football. This seems like an obvious case of Wikipedia:Canvassing (scale, audience). Jweiss11 (talk) 03:52, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I warned the user about canvassing, and I trust the closer wasn't going to merely count !votes anyways.—Bagumba (talk) 04:10, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Response I hope you also took the time to actually read the message I left on their talk pages before accusing me of any wrong doing.

Hello! There is an article that has been nominated for deletion regarding the Michigan State football team. I noticed you were an alumni, so I thought I would let you know in case you have any interest in participating with the discussion. If so, please just click on the Title as I have linked it straight to the page's deletion review. If you wish to see the article itself, it is titled Michigan State Miracle. Any thoughts, ideas, or edits that would help improve the page itself would also be appreciated!

I've actually been contributing to Wikipedia since it's creation in 2001, so I know the rules. All I did was inform Michigan State Alumni user's that there was a discussion they may be interested in taking part in. By no way was I ever trying to sway their personal opinion in one way or another. In fact, the first Michigan State alumni who did show up commented that he would not support the page. Thanks! Stubbleboy 17:22, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Issue addressed on Bagumba's talk page. Now informing University of Michigan alumni as well of this discussion. Regardless of the school your userbox states you attended (which is completely unverifiable and irrelevant), it makes the event no less significant then it actually was. Thanks! Stubbleboy 17:57, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there was ill will on your part. The message was fine, the only concern was the limited distribution list, which you have addressed. No harm, no foul.—Bagumba (talk) 18:31, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, alumni is a plural. I don't know if that's a blockable offense. Drmies (talk) 00:56, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Stubbleboy, I did read your message, and you should note that I qualified my accusation of canvassing above on the dimensions of scale and audience, not message. Your message is indeed neutral, but the scale of your posting is excessive and your initial target audience was partisan. I'm not looking to make a big deal about this, but you should probably refrain from this sort of alumni-targeted posting, even if it's balanced, particularly on college sports topics. A quick review of Wikipedia:Canvassing would be helpful. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:14, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:35, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator comment

[edit]

There is now a College GameDay blog post that calls it the "Michigan State Miracle" by that very name. --Shirt58 (talk) 13:12, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It really is such an amazing play, isn't it? I had the pleasure of watching the game next to a Michigan Wolverines fan (I'm a fan of rival Ohio State). He jumped out of his seat and yelled "Mike...Mike.. No, Mike... Noooo!!" Then we just both sat there in silence for about 20 seconds. I was so kind to him, I looked over and said "I'm sorry bro, that is just horrible." I really felt bad for him, how sad, they had the game won if that punt was successful. Also, Shirt58, check THIS OUT if you have a chance. It's the Wiki2 version of the article, and I think it looks incredible. Cheers! Stubbleboy 18:26, 27 October 2015 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Michigan_State_Miracle&oldid=1138079581"