Deletion of Texas Longhorns football series records

Comment: These types of lists have been discussed at some length at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football#UB Bulls Football Records|here in Nov. 2015 and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football/Archive 16#Category:College football all-time series records|here in Sept. 2015.  As for , it remains my view that a number of editors (including some deletionists) have incorrectly interpreted NOTSTATS.  Its purpose, as I understand it, is to require context for stats and to avoid pure data dumps.  If there is a statistical list that is notable and not indisciminate, NOTSTATS suggests that any such listing should have contextual narrative text and citations. The introductory sentence of  emphasizes precisely this: "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations referenced to independent sources."   As {{ping|Ejgreen77}} has noted elsewere, if NOTSTATS was a valid basis for deleting statistical listings regardless of notability, it could be used to support deletion of highly notable statistical lists such as: List of college football coaches with 200 wins, List of NCAA football records, List of NCAA Division I FBS running backs with at least 5,000 rushing yards, etc.  IMO, the real issue is not whether such lists are precluded under NOTSTATS. Rather, as suggested by {{ping|Bagumba}}, the real issues here are whether the lists satisfy  and whether, even if the subject is notable, we ought to exercise editorial judgment under  to opt against a stand-alone list/article.  In this case, I would exercise our editorial judgment to avoid such articles for two reasons. First, I have concerns about our ability to maintain such sprawling lists, as the data at issue is massive (particularly if there are such lists for hundreds of college football programs) and changes with great frequency.  Second, the same data sets are published off Wikipedia by organizations (e.g., http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/schools/texas/head-to-head.html here) that are better equipped to perform regular updates of the data
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTSTATS||WP:NOTSTATS||WP:LISTN||WP:PAGEDECIDE)

Comment: Shatterdaymorn has come along and added the kind of text-based contextual significance that articles like this one need (and that, really, so few of our list-class CFB articles currently have, unfortunately). Right now, 14 years into the Wikipedia experiment, there are only ten such lists currently in existence, so I find the idea that there will suddenly be hundreds of such lists to maintain to be an exaggeration, at best. And, as far as the whole "well, this stuff is already available elsewhere" argument, need I remind anyone of https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3AWikiProject_College_football&type=revision&diff=695457173&oldid=695439988 this? Just because it's available now, doesn't mean that it always will be. And, adding the information into the main Longhorns page would just result in over burdening and cluttering up the main Texas Longhorns football article, which is the whole reason why it was split out into a separate list article in the first place. IMHO, this information should be  somewhere, and it's probably best, easiest, and most logical to just keep it right here
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Editing policy (WP:PRESERVED)

Comment: Fails to meet , which requires that the grouping to be discussed by independent, reliable sources. Rivalries would meet coverage for a series with an individual team, but non-rivaries usually just mention the overall record in passing,  Concerns with  and  precludes a merge to Texas Longhorns football to 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:LISTN||WP:UNDUE||WP:FANCRUFT||WP:PRESERVE)

Comment: per Masem's  argument. Not especially in favor of a merge/redirect situation, as the parent article already has the appropriate content, and its not especially a good search term
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: The Texas Longhorns are a historically significant college football team  with extensive coverage of their history. Does it fail #STAT? The table doesn't represent excessive statistics. It is similar to a season by season list, but instead focuses on the team vs. team results. Representing the information this way highlight different features. This table tells you who Texas has played, when they first played, when they last played, and also who they have not played. This is information you can not easily discover if you consult just the season by season records of the team or the List of Texas Longhorns football seasons. This information is certainly notable  since all-time record versus a team is frequently cited when discussing an up-coming game. The article could use more explanatory prose, but that is just a reason for expansion not deletion. Note: I am the original author of the page though I have not updated this page for a while. (Sorry for deleting the PROD without explanation. I have never had one of my pages proposed for deletion and did it to stop the automatic deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ORGIN||WP:NOT||WP:GNG)

Comment: Fails #STAT. While the team's overall win-loss record or even season by season is reasonable to keep in other articles, specific team-based win-losses make no sense, though I believe that the Longhorns do have a notable rivalry with one team that can be documented there
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)