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 delete‎. ✗plicit 12:21, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lexington SC - Louisville City Rivalry (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Too much work done on this, doesn't qualify under WP:NRIVALRY, sources are routine coverage. We've deleted multiple types of these articles already. This is no different. Govvy (talk) 12:21, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agree that the article is not notable and should be deleted. Hard to call something a "rivalry" if there's only ever been a single competitive match played. gingerlines (talk) 14:04, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

both teams refer to this as a rivalry, and you’ll likely never get more than routine coverage on these lower division rivalries. What’s the point of deleting this article just to have to remake it in 2-3 years? Snakshopp (talk) 14:38, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, every other of Louisville’s rivalries has a page— and the one with Lexington is the one they advertise the most. As a native of the area, both towns are flying the flags of the individual teams in the downtown area to hype up the game. Just because you aren’t familiar with the rivalry doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist Snakshopp (talk) 14:44, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For rivalries to be notable they must recieve significant coverage. This rivalry does not, so it should be deleted. Esolo5002 (talk) 16:06, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think there's certainly value in keeping this in the draftspace until there's more coverage and a few more matches have been played between the clubs, but as it currently stands it does not satisfy the general notability guidelines required for a rivalry article. The point of remaking it in 2/3 years (or less) is that it will fit within the WP guidelines at that time. I'm confident that as the teams play one another there will be more reliable coverage that can establish notability, just not yet.

And as a former Lexington resident I personally couldn't be more excited for what I'm sure will be a robust rivalry between the teams in the future! But one competitive match and not a single reliable third-party source specifically discussing the 'rivalry' means we'll have to wait a little bit before it is notable. gingerlines (talk) 16:14, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then if that is the case, I think he vast majority of the USL rivalry pages need to be deleted. Sure something like LIPAFC is fine but Dirty Rivers Derby, Southwestern Showdown and Silver State Cup all fail to fulfil the requirement of having a third party article discussing what the rivalry means. If the rules are going to be applied then they certainly need to be applied consistently.

The reason I think it shouldn't be deleted is that the information is already here, the rivalry does exist (both sides are producing media about it, they are going to play 2-3 times a season and the only reason Lex SC even got promoted was to give Louisville a rival). Ultimately the issue is about the USL itself. When new pro sports teams form, so do rivalries, and nobody would argue against them deserving a page. Is the issue that the USL itself isn't big enough to garner significant coverage? Snakshopp (talk) 01:44, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you take issue with the notability of other articles, you are welcome to bring it up in their respective talk pages. This is a consideration for deleting this specific article, not others. I will note, however, that with the exception of the Silver State Cup the other pages you mention all have quite a few more external references. And, most significantly, the teams have played one another enough to have real notable history prior to creating the articles.

If you can pull together additional external citations to show that, indeed, "the rivalry does exist" (which I find hard to believe, considering only a single competitive match has been played between the teams, then perhaps this article would qualify. As that has not happened, I am firmly believe this article does not meet notability requirements and should be deleted. gingerlines (talk) 17:58, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Kentucky. Skynxnex (talk) 15:58, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 09:26, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 09:31, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete but if in the future this receives significant coverage after games are played, someone should feel free to create it. SportingFlyer T·C 06:40, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per failing GNG. NRIVALRY is not a good moniker for determining a rivalry article. Instead it should be based around sources actually claiming their rivalry does indeed exist. Conyo14 (talk) 17:20, 3 March 2025 (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.