Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/QClash (2nd nomination)
My point was that even though this rivalry match fails under the  policy, another user tried to argue it was in fact a  (in effect trying to get a |'change of venue' to render the entire debate invalid via a technicality). I pointed out that not only does it fail  it also fails most if not all of the tenets of , making the  attempt at the |policy shopping invalid anyway (just like the attempt at policy shopping with  appears invalid). I am not 'demanding' international coverage, only pointing it out as one minor part of the requirements for passing . Secondly, none of those articles have anything to do with why the rivalry is important only that the fixture exists
— User:Macktheknifeau, 00:51, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:NRIVALRY||WP:EVENT||WP:PS||WP:NRIVALRY||WP:EVENT||WP:LAWYERING||WP:PS||WP:LOCALCONSENSUS||WP:EVENT (Wikipedia:Notability)