Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Two-hour marathon
- 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The result was Withdrawn. RL0919 (talk) 05:07, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Two-hour marathon (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)
The content of the article is covered by Marathon world record progression and Marathon#All-time_top_25. The article is not notable by itself IlkkaP (talk) 03:24, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Sport of athletics-related AfD discussions and list of Sports-related AfD discussions IlkkaP (talk) 03:24, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- Comment - This article seems possibly notable to me, as we have Breaking2 and Ineos 1:59 Challenge.
However, I am not sure how to assess the notability quantitatively, so I am neutral to this AFD.Sun8908 Talk 04:35, 27 April 2026 (UTC)- Comment - Those two arcticles you mention refer to specific events. However, Two-hour marathon is generic. If we keep the article, I suppose we need to start updating it every time a the two-hour barrier is broken, unless the article is meant to refer to this specific event of the barrier being broken the first time (in which case the article title is not correct). IlkkaP (talk) 06:48, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- For reference, please see 10-second barrier (distinct from men's 100 metres world record progression) or Four-minute mile (distinct from Mile run world record progression).
- Would we keep updating it every time the two-hour barrier is broken? I would think yes (like at 10-second barrier), until the list becomes WP:TOOLONG as decided by Wikipedians, at which point the article would shift to only discussing the history or subcategories as at four-minute mile. Even in some hypothetical future universe where breaking the two-hour barrier becomes routine, that would only impact individual races and wouldn't subtract from the notability of the "two-hour marathon" concept.
- No, the article isn't meant to refer only to that specific event – that would be the 2026 London Marathon article – instead, it's about the time barrier itself and its coverage in reliable sources. --Habst (talk) 09:20, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- @Sun8908, taking a look at the sources added, would you be willing to accept an early withdrawn/keep closure? Per below, the nominator stated they are OK with a keep closure, but as you !voted neutral I wouldn't want to quickly close the discussion without consensus. I think a timely closure would be nice as the article could potentially be linked to in a WP:ITN hook. --Habst (talk) 10:45, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- Keep and endorse early closure was considering this myself until I saw your comment. Clear keep, and I think this article's existence is totally in line with precedent. We should probably just get this one over with if possible. DiscoursesonLivvy (talk · contribs) 12:47, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- I didn't know a !vote neutral would make early closure impossible. I am striking the !vote. Sun8908 Talk 14:59, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- Comment - Those two arcticles you mention refer to specific events. However, Two-hour marathon is generic. If we keep the article, I suppose we need to start updating it every time a the two-hour barrier is broken, unless the article is meant to refer to this specific event of the barrier being broken the first time (in which case the article title is not correct). IlkkaP (talk) 06:48, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- Comment - This article seems worth keeping up, particularly because the sub-two hour barrier has been one discussed in both sports commentary circles and academia. For instance, this 2010 paper by sports scientists Jones, Kirby, Clark and colleagues analyzes the physiological barriers to such a task. This paper analyzes the likelihood that such an event would come to pass, as does this paper. Additionally, this literature review from earlier this year talks in-depth about the science behind such a feat. Among commentators, I'd defer to citations within this article, alongside the bulk of news articles on this topic right now. On this basis, I'd argue that such a feat is notable enough to warrant its own page. Because of this, I believe it'd be worth it to keep this article. WhatIsAPoggers (talk) 07:14, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- Comment - This is a historic barrier and a historic accomplishment in Athletics. Its unique, zero relation to just "world record progression". I fact, a sub-2 hours marathon goes beyond athletics and has existed in the popular imagination for decades, I believe since Bikila began to haunt the world more than 60 years ago. I agree with all the statements of WhatIsAPoggers above. MachoCarioca (talk) 08:18, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- Keep - sources presented in the article and sources listed by WhatIsAPoggers (which I have added to the article as, temporarily, further reading items) are, for me, sufficient to meet WP:GNG. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 09:14, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- Comment - OK, there are multiple editors expressing support for keep. It is OK for me to close the discussion with result as Keep IlkkaP (talk) 09:39, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- keep - like the users above me mentioned, this subject seems to be important, and a lot of sources are covering it now MrCryptoNerd (talk) 10:36, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- Keep per above. Achmad Rachmani (talk) 12:10, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- Keep (seriously?) Randy Kryn (talk) 14:01, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- 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.