Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/USM Alger–ES Sétif 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 delete. Sam Walton (talk) 11:09, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

USM Alger–ES Sétif rivalry

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

Appears to fail WP:GNG. The only source provided is an unofficial website. There may exist some good French/Arabic websites for this rivalry but I can't find any. Also a possible violation of WP:NOTSTATS. Spiderone 12:31, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone 13:06, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 13:09, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Aside from WP:NOTSTATS issues, WP:NRIVALRY requires GNG to be met. Yes, these teams have played a number of times, but that in itself does not create a notable rivalry. I see no indication of significant, reliable coverage of the the notion of a rivalry between the two clubs. Fenix down (talk) 13:34, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. Giant Snowman 18:07, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This article concerne a rivalry between two of the best clubs in Algeria (Football in Algeria). It's considered as one of some classicos in the country. --Fayçal.09 (talk) 19:47, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - can you provide links to sources that provide significant discussion of the rivalry, not just match reports? Fenix down (talk) 08:55, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 04:55, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The burden of proof is on those arguing to keep the article. Right now the article is mostly a table with the match history and nothing has been provided to substantiate the depth of this rivalry. Even then it would need to be looked at beyond WP:ROUTINE. As it stands now, I don't see that WP:SIGCOV is being met. Mkdw ^talk 05:19, 30 December 2015 (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.