Deletion of Stevenage F.C. 3–1 Newcastle United F.C.

Comment: I originally thought delete per . But I'm reconsidering. One criterion we often apply is "Would this article receive detailed mention in a reasonable history of one, or both, of the two teams?". I'm thinking this might be a "yes" for Stevenage, but I'm unsure. If Stevenage were non-league, I'd say a definite "keep". If a more prominent team, it'd be a clear "delete". But with the team's lack of much glory to write about, this may well be a prominent result. It may be too soon to say. I'll ponder and return
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: Another giant killing and example of recentism. Delete per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: per  particularly #NEWS and . Wikipedia is not an almanac, nor a collection of statistics, nor a news source. This has attracted a lot of media attention and maybe passes  because it's a football game not just the result, so you could end up having an article on any major sporting match because of the thirst of modern media. But at the end of the day, it's just a cup game between two league sides - there were about 40 such at the weekend - which ended up with a surprise result - note the difference between positions of Crawley-Derby on Monday night was just the same. There would be scores of similar results every season. At this moment unlike the Hereord-Newcastle game which has an article, it doesn't stand the test of time, since it was just a few days since the game. At this moment in time, delete
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:NOT||WP:RECENTISM||WP:GNG)

Comment: per . A surprising result, but games like these aren't ''that'' uncommon - League Two Notts County defeated Premier League opposition just last year
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Recentism (WP:RECENT)

Comment: yes this has coverage, but not "substantial" coverage - most of the reports seem to regurgitate the same old nonsense about "giant-killing", "old rivalry" etc. when anyone with a decent understanding of the sport knows that this simply isn't the case. Maybe (maybe) it'll prove itself to have a lasting impact in the future, but we don't have |crystal balls that see into the future, so can't make that assumption
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: as per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Recentism (WP:RECENTISM)

Comment: There is potential here for a Stevenage - Newcastle rivalry page covering both games, 1998 and 2011, and this would be a valid redirect to that page.  therefore indicates a keep outcome, seeing as that rivaly page does not yet exist, and much of it's content could come from this page. There is adequate coverage (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/fa_cup/9345266.stm example) of this as a rivalry to meet 's requirements for GNG level evidence of lasting, in-depth coverage. It's not routine for sports media to devote whole pieces about past matches as pre-match coverage, unless there is a notable rivalry already, so it also meets ports event too. Given that the actual result of the 2011 game was clearly a major cup upset on its won, as per the sources already in the article, this only adds to the case of the likely enduring notability of the rivalry, should they ever meet a third time (which is not exactly an impossiblility). Granted, a Newcastle Stevenage rivalry page will not receive as many page views as England Germany, but as an issue for Afd, that's completely irrelevant, as is the fact that the rivalry would obviously mean more to Stevenage than it would to Newcastle, in a history of the respective clubs
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Editing policy (WP:PRESERVE||WP:EVENT||WP:S)

Comment: to 2010–11 Stevenage F.C. season. The match might be notable in time, but it only happened a few days ago, and the contents though well-sourced are basically routine reporting; assuming lasting significance would IMO be . It's clearly a major event in Stevenage's season, and a significant event in their history so far, and a giant-killing. But as yet, we just can't tell if it will have any lasting and substantial coverage once the novelty wears off. cheers
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)