- 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 of the debate was no consensus, and I also hate the fact that Magic players get coverage. They should get a life. :) - CrazyRougeian talk/email 08:46, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
AfDs for this article:
A big name in the Street Fighter community does not equal notability. Danny Lilithborne 03:45, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Nowadays he is known worldwide, thanks to the Evo tournament video and others. The video is watched even by people who doesn't have much knowledge about the game, due to this dramatic characteristic. A well research would evidence that others countries makes his fame also. Examples are communities in Orkut.com dedicated to him: http://www.orkut.com/Community.aspx?cmm=8410635.This should be considered.
- Keep - He is not known here except in the hardcore gaming community. He is VERY known in Japan. He doesn't get coverage in the States? Might as well remove all entries about all singers that don't sing in english while you're at it. I'm telling you he means a lot to the Japanese gaming community, they've made Ascii Arts of him on 2chan. DenkouNova 22:54, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - I think that he is in fact notable. He's an international champion of what he does. International champion surfers and Magic card players are in here, so why not this guy too? Richardcavell 03:54, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Surfers get coverage. Magic card players (as much as it pains people to admit) also get coverage. Street Fighter players do not. Even at the height of SF's popularity, they never got any notable coverage. Danny Lilithborne 03:57, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Magic card players' coverage is mostly limited to promotional material, community sites, and David Williams for his poker playing. --ColourBurst 02:49, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Surfers get coverage. Magic card players (as much as it pains people to admit) also get coverage. Street Fighter players do not. Even at the height of SF's popularity, they never got any notable coverage. Danny Lilithborne 03:57, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete He may be an international champion, but only at something incredibly obscure and specific. Someone like Fatal1ty is notable because he achieved recognition in the mainstream media and financial success through sponsorship. --IslaySolomon 04:06, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletions. -- ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 04:16, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Richardcavell. I think it needs more sourcing rather than deletion. It's very likely he received sponsorships and other notable news coverage within Japan. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 04:16, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep per Nihonjoe. Needs sourcing. - Wickning1 04:29, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Daigo is equally notable as Jonathan Wendel in the gaming community. Also, Daigo is notable in Japan even among the general gamer, not just SF players and has been featured on a DVD. Also he has a imdb profile and is written in gamespot. [1] [2]
(7/3/2006) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.248.218.111 (talk • contribs)
- Comment That IMDB entry is for "Bang the Machine", an out-of-print documentary about the SF scene. I was the one who submitted the info on the players that appeared in that movie; otherwise he wouldn't have an IMDB profile, which is all kinds of ironic. And the GameSpot "article" is just rankings for EVO in 2003. If your claims about him being known in Japanese circles is true, then it should be rewritten with verifiable sources as such, and "I know a Japanese guy who totally knows Daigo" doesn't count. Danny Lilithborne 06:04, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Seems of infinitesimal notability to me. Delete. -- Hoary 07:19, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Against Better Judgement Keep - I'm opposed to having articles on Magic champions but this guy is more notable than a whole raft of minor gaming persons that I am in the minority on wanting to remove. MLA 08:11, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Minor gaming celeb. -- GWO
- Delete as non-notable. The Magic card game players should go too, but that's another AfD. -- Kjkolb 10:22, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, not a player of a traditional sport, but a "champion" fighter all the same, keep. —Pengo 10:44, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete article on an individual video-game player. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:36, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep more notable then any of these "Category:Magic:_The_Gathering_players". The point is that people could randomly want to find information on who the best player in SF is, since the game has been played by everyone. It is the same with Magic. People who vote against have so far lacked an argument. — Preceding unsigned comment added by killerhun00 (talk • contribs)
- Comment "People might randomly want to find information" is hardly a convincing argument. Danny Lilithborne 18:31, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment What is Wikipedia for if not for finding information? Your counter-argument has no value at all. DenkouNova 23:06, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment It's not for random finding of information, to be sure, otherwise we wouldn't have Articles for Deletion proceedings. Danny Lilithborne 23:31, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Um...the last time I checked AfD are because people have A. Fake articles, B. Articles that are unverifiable C. Article of zero notablilty. Much of the information on Wikipedia is found randomly, mainly through the well-organized link process (ie hyperlink in a different article, and lists) this is what make wikipedia great. In fact this is what most people do. For example lets say a person interested in the "History of SF" accidently stumbles upon "Daigo Umehara" in the Street Fighter article. If you are stating that this is not random, or the person has no interest in "The Best Player in SF" then I can say with 100% certainty that you have no idea what you are talking about. SF has a large enough following of causal players that people not searching for the best SF player or even the SF tournament scene would be interested in reading about Daigo. Lets take another example: The other day I "randomly" stumbled upon Kardashev scale. I came across this while reading "Energy economics" which linked through the category to Kardashev scale. Now that was completely random, I also found Kardashev scale to be one of the most interesting reads in my life. Therefore, Lilithborne, you are done stop talking. 71.248.218.111 05:22, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- This is the last comment I'm going to make regarding this, because you obviously are not willing to listen to reason. The majority of articles that go through the AfD process are biographies of people considered not notable. This is just another one of them. I played SF for a long, long time and I'm pretty sure I know more about Daigo than you do. (A-Guy, anyone?) However, unlike poker, whose players have widespread popularity, SF remains, as MCB eloquently put it, an insular gaming community that rejects "newbies", ironically when they need new blood the most. "History of SF" on Wikipedia should be about the game in and of itself; the tournaments held, for the most part, failed to influence its evolution in any significant way. Now, as someone who has been playing SF seriously for about seven years, rest assured that you, like many other fanatics before you, greatly overestimate the influence of SF on society. So, since reason's lost on you, I'll leave it at this: Daigo Umehara is not notable enough for an encyclopedia entry and that, my friend, is that. What happens after this point is not up to you or me, but the admins. Danny Lilithborne 06:07, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I would like you to know that I am not part of the SF community. I rarely play SF and see it nothing more than a causal game. I found this article to be notable and interesting. I stumbled upon this article through the category, japanese people. Therefore if I find this article to be notable, it probably is, since I do not belong in the interest group. 71.248.218.111 18:38, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- This is the last comment I'm going to make regarding this, because you obviously are not willing to listen to reason. The majority of articles that go through the AfD process are biographies of people considered not notable. This is just another one of them. I played SF for a long, long time and I'm pretty sure I know more about Daigo than you do. (A-Guy, anyone?) However, unlike poker, whose players have widespread popularity, SF remains, as MCB eloquently put it, an insular gaming community that rejects "newbies", ironically when they need new blood the most. "History of SF" on Wikipedia should be about the game in and of itself; the tournaments held, for the most part, failed to influence its evolution in any significant way. Now, as someone who has been playing SF seriously for about seven years, rest assured that you, like many other fanatics before you, greatly overestimate the influence of SF on society. So, since reason's lost on you, I'll leave it at this: Daigo Umehara is not notable enough for an encyclopedia entry and that, my friend, is that. What happens after this point is not up to you or me, but the admins. Danny Lilithborne 06:07, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Um...the last time I checked AfD are because people have A. Fake articles, B. Articles that are unverifiable C. Article of zero notablilty. Much of the information on Wikipedia is found randomly, mainly through the well-organized link process (ie hyperlink in a different article, and lists) this is what make wikipedia great. In fact this is what most people do. For example lets say a person interested in the "History of SF" accidently stumbles upon "Daigo Umehara" in the Street Fighter article. If you are stating that this is not random, or the person has no interest in "The Best Player in SF" then I can say with 100% certainty that you have no idea what you are talking about. SF has a large enough following of causal players that people not searching for the best SF player or even the SF tournament scene would be interested in reading about Daigo. Lets take another example: The other day I "randomly" stumbled upon Kardashev scale. I came across this while reading "Energy economics" which linked through the category to Kardashev scale. Now that was completely random, I also found Kardashev scale to be one of the most interesting reads in my life. Therefore, Lilithborne, you are done stop talking. 71.248.218.111 05:22, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment It's not for random finding of information, to be sure, otherwise we wouldn't have Articles for Deletion proceedings. Danny Lilithborne 23:31, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment What is Wikipedia for if not for finding information? Your counter-argument has no value at all. DenkouNova 23:06, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment "People might randomly want to find information" is hardly a convincing argument. Danny Lilithborne 18:31, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep, per above --AlexDW 17:10, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom -- Alias Flood 00:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as non-notable biography, unknown outside a small and insular gaming community. --MCB 06:50, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I just hear about Daigo through Wikipedia. I am not a part of the SF scene, and found this article to be very interesting. This person seems notable. 204.52.215.13 00:10, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep A legend in his community and someone that people who read about street fighter should hear about. He is an interesting side note in SF history. -Kbalch.
- Keep I'm going to regret this but I am going to do serious damage to my deletionist reputation by voting keep. I think that this kid is notable in his field and I think that WP should be a broad enough church to find a place for guys like him. BlueValour 03:52, 8 July 2006 (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.