359:
to divisional play in 1992. (The other was Auburn-Florida, which ceased to be annual in 2002). I have seen numerous mentions of the Auburn-Tennessee series as a traditional "rivalry," certainly more so than this one, but it remains to be seen if it would survive GNG scrutiny. Some of these old CFB series, including this one, require a considerable amount of WP:BEFORE background research in
Newspapers.com, Google News Archive, Google Books, etc., before nominating one for AfD.
329:. No special claim of notability is made. All of the sources are blogs, non-reliable or non-independent sources. Doubtless sources could be added to verify the scores and dates of the games, but those would not add toward notability of the rivalry. Old newspapers via Google and via Newspaper Archives Online don't seem to regard this as a "rivalry". Unlike the Mississippi–Mississippi State football rivalry or the
682:(which really surprised me), I strongly believe that this article is just as notable! Yep, I'm going against the grain on this one (even though I realize which way this will go seeing as whom I'm up against), but I'm sticking my neck out on this one anyway. Knowledge (XXG) is so fickle when it comes to applying its own rules!
616:
I'd also say many "classic" rivalries come and go. Is wiki getting rid of history because it cannot be found online? Good info on a subject such as this may be more difficult to discover. Florida at one time always played Miami as their first game of the year which gave that game a sense of rivalry.
358:
The Auburn-Tennessee rivalry article is on my list of rivalry articles to review for notability. As a threshold matter, however, Auburn-Tennessee was recognized by southeastern sports commentators of as one of the better SEC annual home-and-away series that got dumped when the SEC expanded and went
377:
In doing my due diligence for this Afd, the rivalries that came up most often were the
Mississippi–Mississippi State football rivalry and the Auburn–Tennessee football rivalry. I agree that sometimes background research is tedious, the more so as it tends towards comprehensiveness. I would suggest
417:
and their footnotes; for unquestionably notable rivalries, there are usually multiple feature articles in newspapers and sports magazines, as well as stand-alone books about the specific rivalry. These rivalry AfDs drive me nuts because people will find a 1935 newspaper article that mentions an
225:
of sources mentioning this series as a "rivalry" will be a key aspect in this discussion: if sources are not independent (no athletic department releases, yearbooks, school newspapers, etc.) and reliable (no blogs, fansites, etc.), they cannot be used to sustain the subject's notability. Any
602:?" and quoted the UT player who compared Ole Miss to a "bunch of mules" when asked by a reporter if Ole Miss had "a bunch of horses?" Classic bulletin board game, fun SEC history game, mention belongs in the 1969 season articles. Still not a classic traditional rivalry though.
408:
Frankly, I wouldn't dream of starting a new CFB rivalry article without sourcing it in depth. Of course, all of the established rivalries I would want to work on already have articles. If you want to see examples of properly sourced CFB rivalry articles, take a look at
230:
in mainstream news sources should be substantial, i.e., not trivial mentions of a "rivalry," but substantial discussions of the series' history, traditions, and significance as a "rivalry". This article was previously submitted for proposed deletion per
652:. The problem is whether said historical rivalry meets the notability criteria, and whether every regular, conference opponent constitutes a "rivalry." I have mixed feelings about this rivalry too, and thus have left myself out of the voting part.
170:
386:, often free at larger public libraries, or physically visit the morgues (newspaper archives at the newspaper) of relevant newspapers, and find citations to independent sources prior to writing new articles. Magazines such as
494:
Winsipedia is not a reliable source, and the only other source is an ESPN article that does not contain the word "rivalry" at all. This looks like original research to me, but if it's not it still doesn't pass
620:). I genuinely laugh (and also am a bit sad) when articles end up in AFD without being given some time to grow. Sure, if an article's a commercial or completely laughable (even those sometimes don't get deleted
516:
per nom. In addition to
Dirtlawyer's research, I conducted a number of searches on newspapers.com and found nothing treating the Tennessee - Ole Miss series as a rivalry, and certainly nothing with any depth.
164:
96:
91:
302:
257:
100:
584:
is referring to the
November 15, 1969 game in which Mississippi trounced Tennessee 38 to 0. There was a lot of excitment before that game because Tennessee was ranked #3 in the nation. --
83:
211:-- in multiple, independent, reliable sources. Instances of mainstream coverage in reliable sources of this purported "rivalry" are trivial, and any significant coverage of this series
123:
418:"annual rivalry" and then argue that as the basis for something meaningful. Part of the problem is many AfD participants don't agree on what constitutes "significant coverage."
264:
457:
130:
474:
535:
440:
598:
The background is that coach Johnny Vaught trolled his own players (to motivate them) by having a plane drop leaflets over the Ole Miss practice field that said "
333:, which, by the way, is sorely lacking in citation to independent, reliable sources, for which newspaper articles detailing the rivalry can be found. --
185:
152:
217:
is only found on fan sites, blogs and other non-reliable or non-independent sources that are not suitable for establishing notability per GNG. The
645:
690:
661:
635:
611:
593:
566:
547:
526:
508:
483:
466:
449:
427:
403:
368:
342:
314:
294:
244:
65:
641:
330:
146:
414:
410:
142:
17:
192:
640:
I agree rivalries come and go, and assume we are fine with rivalries of a more historical than contemporary significance. e. g.
87:
158:
79:
71:
709:
40:
617:
Then it was changed in 1987 and gone was that intense conflict between those two (oddly enough that rivalry is on wiki
201:
The Ole Miss-Tennessee college football game series is not notable under the general notability guidelines per
627:
creates an article, they should spend time in AFD. It's given me a very cynical viewpoint on the subject.
504:
325:
for lack of substantive, much less significant, coverage in independent reliable sources, hence failling
705:
683:
628:
607:
575:
559:
558:
Weren't these two teams part of the 1969 "Mule Game"? I that could be the rivalry that has since faded.
479:
462:
445:
423:
364:
310:
290:
240:
36:
657:
379:
178:
282:
259:
11 hits for quoted phrase, all
Knowledge (XXG) article or process pages, or mirror articles/pages;
235:
on
October 2nd, but the article creator removed the PROD tag without explanation on October 5th.
649:
266:
10 hits for quoted phase, all
Knowledge (XXG) article or process pages, or mirror articles/pages;
680:
618:
543:
500:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
704:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
232:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
603:
589:
419:
399:
360:
338:
306:
286:
236:
61:
496:
326:
202:
653:
522:
394:
used to have an occasional story on college football rivalries in their sports section. --
599:
539:
117:
585:
395:
353:
334:
57:
518:
623:), but this article is neither. I, also, strongly believe that before anyone
621:
281:
These are are good places for AfD discussion participants' to begin their
274:"Ole Miss Tennessee rivalry" (Google search): 0 hits for quoted phrase.
270:"Ole Miss-Tennessee rivalry" (Google search): 0 hits for quoted phrase;
698:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
383:
56:
voter, their argument is a variation on OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.
263:"Ole Miss Tennessee football rivalry" (Google search):
256:"Ole Miss-Tennessee football rivalry" (Google search):
113:
109:
105:
303:
list of
American football-related deletion discussions
177:
191:
679:After finding the Miami vs Florida rivalry on wiki
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
712:). No further edits should be made to this page.
458:list of Mississippi-related deletion discussions
499:or any other notability guideline I can find.--
475:list of Tennessee-related deletion discussions
8:
536:list of Schools-related deletion discussions
534:Note: This debate has been included in the
473:Note: This debate has been included in the
456:Note: This debate has been included in the
439:Note: This debate has been included in the
441:list of Events-related deletion discussions
301:Note: This debate has been included in the
533:
472:
455:
438:
300:
249:Here are some relevant key word searches:
208:as a traditional college football rivalry
382:that he or she obtain a subscription to
205:, for lack of significant coverage --
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
80:Ole Miss–Tennessee football rivalry
72:Ole Miss–Tennessee football rivalry
24:
331:Auburn–Tennessee football rivalry
415:Florida–Georgia football rivalry
411:Auburn–Florida football rivalry
1:
691:18:18, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
662:03:11, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
636:16:37, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
612:08:58, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
594:08:32, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
567:06:22, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
548:02:20, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
527:20:59, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
509:13:45, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
484:12:44, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
467:12:44, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
450:12:44, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
428:03:34, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
404:03:24, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
369:03:04, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
343:02:47, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
315:00:39, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
295:00:34, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
245:00:34, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
66:04:24, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
52:. Unfortunately for the one
729:
384:Newspaper Archives Online
701:Please do not modify it.
226:mentions of this series
32:Please do not modify it.
550:
486:
469:
452:
317:
285:due diligence.
720:
703:
686:MurderByDeadcopy
631:MurderByDeadcopy
582:
579:MurderByDeadcopy
562:MurderByDeadcopy
482:
465:
448:
357:
196:
195:
181:
133:
121:
103:
34:
728:
727:
723:
722:
721:
719:
718:
717:
716:
710:deletion review
699:
576:
478:
461:
444:
351:
138:
129:
94:
78:
75:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
726:
724:
715:
714:
694:
693:
673:
672:
671:
670:
669:
668:
667:
666:
665:
664:
570:
569:
552:
551:
530:
529:
511:
488:
487:
470:
453:
436:
435:
434:
433:
432:
431:
430:
380:CollegeRivalry
372:
371:
346:
345:
319:
318:
279:
278:
277:
276:
275:
272:
271:
268:
267:
261:
260:
250:
199:
198:
135:
74:
69:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
725:
713:
711:
707:
702:
696:
695:
692:
689:
688:
687:
681:
678:
675:
674:
663:
659:
655:
651:
647:
643:
639:
638:
637:
634:
633:
632:
626:
622:
619:
615:
614:
613:
609:
605:
601:
597:
596:
595:
591:
587:
583:
581:
580:
574:
573:
572:
571:
568:
565:
564:
563:
557:
554:
553:
549:
545:
541:
537:
532:
531:
528:
524:
520:
515:
512:
510:
506:
502:
501:Paul McDonald
498:
493:
490:
489:
485:
481:
480:North America
476:
471:
468:
464:
463:North America
459:
454:
451:
447:
446:North America
442:
437:
429:
425:
421:
416:
412:
407:
406:
405:
401:
397:
393:
389:
385:
381:
376:
375:
374:
373:
370:
366:
362:
355:
350:
349:
348:
347:
344:
340:
336:
332:
328:
324:
321:
320:
316:
312:
308:
304:
299:
298:
297:
296:
292:
288:
284:
273:
269:
265:
262:
258:
255:
254:
253:
252:
251:
247:
246:
242:
238:
234:
229:
224:
220:
216:
215:
210:
209:
204:
194:
190:
187:
184:
180:
176:
172:
169:
166:
163:
160:
157:
154:
151:
148:
144:
141:
140:Find sources:
136:
132:
128:
125:
119:
115:
111:
107:
102:
98:
93:
89:
85:
81:
77:
76:
73:
70:
68:
67:
63:
59:
55:
53:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
700:
697:
685:
684:
676:
630:
629:
624:
578:
577:
561:
560:
555:
513:
491:
391:
387:
322:
280:
248:
228:as a rivalry
227:
222:
219:independence
218:
214:as a rivalry
213:
212:
207:
206:
200:
188:
182:
174:
167:
161:
155:
149:
139:
126:
51:
49:
47:
31:
28:
604:Dirtlawyer1
420:Dirtlawyer1
361:Dirtlawyer1
307:Dirtlawyer1
287:Dirtlawyer1
237:Dirtlawyer1
223:reliability
165:free images
600:Archie Who
706:talk page
540:• Gene93k
283:WP:BEFORE
37:talk page
708:or in a
392:Newsweek
124:View log
39:or in a
556:Comment
233:WP:PROD
171:WP refs
159:scholar
97:protect
92:history
50:delete'
586:Bejnar
514:Delete
497:WP:GNG
492:Delete
396:Bejnar
354:Bejnar
335:Bejnar
327:WP:GNG
323:Delete
203:WP:GNG
143:Google
101:delete
58:Drmies
519:Cbl62
186:JSTOR
147:books
131:Stats
118:views
110:watch
106:links
16:<
677:Keep
658:talk
654:Cake
625:ever
608:talk
590:talk
544:talk
523:talk
505:talk
424:talk
413:and
400:talk
390:and
388:Time
365:talk
339:talk
311:talk
291:talk
241:talk
221:and
179:FENS
153:news
114:logs
88:talk
84:edit
62:talk
54:keep
378:to
305:.
193:TWL
122:– (
660:)
648:,
644:,
610:)
592:)
546:)
538:.
525:)
507:)
477:.
460:.
443:.
426:)
402:)
367:)
341:)
313:)
293:)
243:)
173:)
116:|
112:|
108:|
104:|
99:|
95:|
90:|
86:|
64:)
656:(
650:3
646:2
642:1
606:(
588:(
542:(
521:(
503:(
422:(
398:(
363:(
356::
352:@
337:(
309:(
289:(
239:(
197:)
189:·
183:·
175:·
168:·
162:·
156:·
150:·
145:(
137:(
134:)
127:·
120:)
82:(
60:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.