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. Secret ^account 03:16, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Distance Derby[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication that there is any genuine rivalry between these two teams. The one reference does not mention anything. This is just a regular game between two teams that happen to be based a long way apart. Fenix down (talk) 08:11, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Non-notable "rivalry". The actual content amounts to trivia that would be better included in the league or club pages. The article seems to be a vehicle to collate vast swathes of stats. (WP:OR - the clubs actually get on very well) Hack (talk) 09:19, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Clearly nothing more than trivia. As per nom. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 20:49, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Fenix down (talk) 11:12, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 14:14, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 14:15, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 14:15, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete what a ridiculous basis for an article, simply a long distance is pure WP:SYNTH that this equates to a notable sporting rivalry. LibStar (talk) 01:43, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence this is a notable sporting rivalry. Giant Snowman 09:38, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. - Nominator (who is Russian and clearly has no knowledge of the subject) failed to follow the WP:BEFORE rules and blindly nominated several related articles with zero talk page discussion. The subject passes WP:GNG but will require some additional work including the addition of more sources. If the nominator had brought the subject up on the talk page, work could have been done on the article to improve sourcing. Upon reading this AFD I myself found a half-dozen reliable sources that cover the subject at hand to help and would have helped clarify that this subject does pass WP:GNG to the nominator, and I'm sure more would have been found should a more thorough search been undertaken. The only thing that matters is passing WP:GNG and this article does that, even though the sources aren't adequately edited at the moment. Macktheknifeau (talk) 10:35, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Please avoid personal attacks in your remarks such as an editor "clearly has no knowledge of the subject", particularly when your preceding comment about me being Russian is wrong! Please also explain the logic behind the comment that the article passes GNG without adequate sources? If there are not adequate sources then it doesn't pass GNG. Fenix down (talk) 11:05, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks should be avoid of the nominator as per WP:ADHOM. LibStar (talk) 02:24, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No evidence of notability here. Nick-D (talk) 11:07, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I can't find a single source that mentions "The Distance Derby" let alone provides it with significant coverage. While it's a cool name, I can't help but suspect that it's original research/original thought. Stalwart111 12:05, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I can easily find instances of this name being used: [1], [2], [3], so it clearly a nickname for games played between the two teams. What I do not see is any sort of in-depth coverage of these two teams having a rivalry or any other substance that would justify an article. What I see is essentially something that would be a dictionary definition. -- Whpq (talk) 16:24, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, look at that! Your google was working much better than mine! Stalwart111 17:54, 22 August 2013 (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.