Talk:Iowa–Penn State wrestling rivalry
(Redirected from Talk:Iowa-Penn State Rivalry)
Latest comment: 7 years ago by JohnInDC in topic Scope / focus of article
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Iowa–Penn State wrestling rivalry article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 18 September 2017. The result of the discussion was Keep but repurpose to include far more references to wrestling. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Scope / focus of article
editMay as well kick this off, eh?
There appears to be a bona fide, well-sourced wrestling rivalry between the two schools. (Here's an NCAA link that hasn't made it into the article: http://www.ncaa.com/video/wrestling/2017-01-31/high-five-wrestling-rivalries-augsburg-wartburg-oklahoma-state-oklahoma .) However, there is little to nothing in third party sources about any corresponding football "rivalry"; and IMHO football facts about a non-notable series (just like swimming, or tennis, or lacrosse facts) involving two schools that happen to share an athletic conference have no place in an article about a notable rivalry between the two in a different sport. I think the article should be renamed "Iowa-Penn State wrestling rivalry", and information about contests in non-"rivalry" sports (football or any other) removed. JohnInDC (talk) 20:44, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
- I think it is silly to throw out useful content. Either keep it the way it is (with trimming of excessive football trivia), with this article covering the overall rivalry between the two teams in multiple sports, or else split into separate articles if both are notable. However, the football part probably doesn't meet GNG at the moment, so splitting is tantamount to deletion of this content. Note that article content is not required to meet GNG, just be supported by refs. The football rivalry is supported by refs, even ones that call it a 'rivalry', so it can remain. Maintain the article as it is for now. The football section can be trimmed significantly to just the list of games and a bit of a blurb of whatever is supported by the refs. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 20:58, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
- Just because content has sources doesn't mean it's "good content" and just because it's not required to meet GNG isn't an excuse to include non-notable information that isn't directly relevant to the topic. Iowa vs. Penn State is not a football rivalry in any measure of the term and outside of wrestling, the two schools do not have anything resembling a rivalry. Their rivalry in wrestling is explained in the source and has to do with their respective national prominence and regular meetings the last several years where both are ranked in the top five. Football? No major games and no indication in sources that either fanbase treats the football game any differently than other conference game. It's similar to the Notre Dame–USC football rivalry, which is only for football. There isn't a basketball rivalry, so basketball isn't mentioned even though the two have played in that sport. As others have said, a rivalry in one sport doesn't necessarily translate to an overall rivalry between schools. I support renaming the article to include wrestling and removing the football content. --JonRidinger (talk) 21:23, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
- The standard for inclusion in an article is not simply "verifiability"; the material has to be at least relevant to the article subject too. The article describes a (for now) unspecified "rivalry" between Iowa and Penn State. Iowa & Penn State do have a wrestling rivalry. They haven't got any other. Discussion of non-rivalry sports in an article that by its own terms is about their "rivalry" is irrelevant, beside the point. Indeed as I've noted elsewhere, the schools' tennis matches, swim meets and golf matches are all verifiable, but are not "rivalries", and are manifestly irrelevant to the article. Football stands in exactly the same place. JohnInDC (talk) 01:21, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
- Based on this discussion I'm inclined to remove the football material, and then proposed a Move. JohnInDC (talk) 00:00, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
- Based on this search [1] It seems that WP:CONSISTENCY is on your side, so I moved it and deleted the content without a WP:RM move proposal (I was the only one opposed anyway, so uncontrovertial). I deleted the football content and moved it to Iowa–Penn State football rivalry, which I then converted into a redirect to List of Big Ten Conference football rivalry games (if someone ever wants to turn the redirect into an article in the future when we have better sourcing, some of the work will already be done for them). — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 00:19, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for doing that, particularly since you were not inclined toward it in the first place. That was very gracious. JohnInDC (talk) 01:57, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
- Based on this search [1] It seems that WP:CONSISTENCY is on your side, so I moved it and deleted the content without a WP:RM move proposal (I was the only one opposed anyway, so uncontrovertial). I deleted the football content and moved it to Iowa–Penn State football rivalry, which I then converted into a redirect to List of Big Ten Conference football rivalry games (if someone ever wants to turn the redirect into an article in the future when we have better sourcing, some of the work will already be done for them). — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 00:19, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
- Based on this discussion I'm inclined to remove the football material, and then proposed a Move. JohnInDC (talk) 00:00, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
- The standard for inclusion in an article is not simply "verifiability"; the material has to be at least relevant to the article subject too. The article describes a (for now) unspecified "rivalry" between Iowa and Penn State. Iowa & Penn State do have a wrestling rivalry. They haven't got any other. Discussion of non-rivalry sports in an article that by its own terms is about their "rivalry" is irrelevant, beside the point. Indeed as I've noted elsewhere, the schools' tennis matches, swim meets and golf matches are all verifiable, but are not "rivalries", and are manifestly irrelevant to the article. Football stands in exactly the same place. JohnInDC (talk) 01:21, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
- Just because content has sources doesn't mean it's "good content" and just because it's not required to meet GNG isn't an excuse to include non-notable information that isn't directly relevant to the topic. Iowa vs. Penn State is not a football rivalry in any measure of the term and outside of wrestling, the two schools do not have anything resembling a rivalry. Their rivalry in wrestling is explained in the source and has to do with their respective national prominence and regular meetings the last several years where both are ranked in the top five. Football? No major games and no indication in sources that either fanbase treats the football game any differently than other conference game. It's similar to the Notre Dame–USC football rivalry, which is only for football. There isn't a basketball rivalry, so basketball isn't mentioned even though the two have played in that sport. As others have said, a rivalry in one sport doesn't necessarily translate to an overall rivalry between schools. I support renaming the article to include wrestling and removing the football content. --JonRidinger (talk) 21:23, 26 September 2017 (UTC)