Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giants–Packers rivalry

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 speedy keep. No determination on whether the nomination was made in good faith, but the result of the discussion below is a clear and obvious keep, with the article's sources establishing notability. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:42, 15 November 2021 (UTC) « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:42, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Giants–Packers rivalry

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Given the precedent set on other rivalry pages, I think this one fits in the same category as Cowboys-Vikings, a historical match-up with lots of lore but not as currently recent. If we are willing to keep historical rivalries around with cultural lore (but not as currently toxic), than this can stay. The precedent recently doesn't support keeping this page. Jackmar1^Talk 14:50, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jackmar1: It appears that you are trying to make a point as you stated in this diff that Giants-Packers has "lots of notability" but threatened to open this AfD if the other AfD didn't go your way. This type of practice is considered disruptive. See WP:POINTy. Cbl62 (talk) 19:12, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:40, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:40, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:40, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2021 November 14. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:52, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, this easily meets GNG per the following:
- Falk, Jonni (December 20, 1986). "Giants, Packers to renew rivalry". The Daily Register. Archived from the original on June 22, 2021. Retrieved June 22, 2021 – via Newspapers.com.
- "Packer-Giants Rivalry One Of The Tightest". Green Bay Press-Gazette. November 2, 1957. Archived from the original on June 22, 2021. Retrieved June 22, 2021 – via Newspapers.com.
- Fly, Colin (January 20, 2008). "Bad weather is old hat in Packers-Giants rivalry". Arizona Republic. Archived from the original on June 22, 2021. Retrieved June 22, 2021 – via Newspapers.com.
- Fine, Larry (January 14, 2012). "Packers, Giants renew rivalry". The Leader-Post. Regina, Saskatchewan. Archived from the original on June 22, 2021. Retrieved June 22, 2021 – via Newspapers.com.
- "Packers, Giants Renew Rivalry, Series Tied Up After 28 Games". Newsday (Nassau Edition). November 15, 1952. Archived from the original on June 22, 2021. Retrieved June 22, 2021 – via Newspapers.com.
- Down, Fred (October 20, 1967). "Packers, Giants In Old Rivalry". Kingsport Times. Archived from the original on June 22, 2021. Retrieved June 22, 2021 – via Newspapers.com.
- "Packers, Giants to Renew Rivalry in Labor Day Game". The Daily Courier. August 31, 1963. Archived from the original on June 22, 2021. Retrieved June 22, 2021 – via Newspapers.com.
- "Giants-Packers, Old, Cold rivalry". The Philadelphia Inquirer. January 6, 2017. Archived from the original on June 22, 2021. Retrieved June 22, 2021 – via Newspapers.com.
- Reischel, Rob (2012-11-24). "Forged in Cold, a Rivalry Runs Hot". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on November 5, 2015. Retrieved 2021-04-08.

BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:00, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the sources identified by BeanieFan. Also, this one of the oldest series (second only to Bears-Packers?) in the NFL, matching two of the league's legendary franchises, closely contested, and dating back almost a hundred years with 62 games played, including three NFL Championship Games. Cbl62 (talk) 18:52, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See also "WP:NOTABILITY IS NOT TEMPORARY". A historic rivalry does not lose its notability simply if it becomes less competitive or "toxic" in later years. Cbl62 (talk) 18:58, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:GNG and WP:NTEMP, per BeanieFan11's sources. Ejgreen77 (talk) 20:06, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - If for no other reason than Lombardi's feelings towards his old team when they played. But of course there are lots of other reasons. Notability is not temporary. Rlendog (talk) 20:36, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Cbl62: Please see my comments on the Cowboys-Rams rivalry. I want to reiterate (and apologize if it doesn't feel this way) that I am trying to ensure consistent standards in how we view rivalries, not make disruptive posts. The key distinction I am trying to make and ask is that rivalries can exist for two reasons 1) current heat, fan bickering (think Cowboys-Eagles, Bears-Packers, Ravens-Steelers, Chiefs-Raiders) 2) historical clout but less recent games (think Cowboys-Steelers, Cowboys-Rams, Packers-Giants, Cowboys-Vikings). I'm seeing a lot of inconsistency in how people define a rivalry on Wikipedia and I think some are prioritizing current heat amongst fans instead of just notability. In my view, a rivalry page can exist to detail iconic NFL moments contained within one NFL match-up. But we just need consistency as my intial post alludes to in creating this discussion. Jackmar1^Talk 14:50, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep clearly meets WP:GNG based on references in the article. Nomination was also made in bad faith. The nominator was disappointed that two articles he/she created were nominated for deletion, so he/she wanted to disrupt Wikipedia to make a point, as shown in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cowboys-Vikings Rivalry. Frank Anchor^Talk 03:01, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Frank Anchor. Clearly meets WP:GNG. --JackFromWisconsin (talk | contribs) 14:27, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep per Frank Anchor's comments. This nomination is clearly made in poor faith, unfortunately. Plus, references above clearly support this page being kept. Spf121188 (talk) 20:58, 15 November 2021 (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.