- 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 keep . Marasmusine (talk) 09:09, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Evil Geniuses (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Video game playing organization fails WP:CLUB, WP:ORG, and WP:GNG. SnottyWong gab 23:22, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. -- N/A0 23:51, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, if you think this needs to be deleted without giving it a chance to expand, simply because you have no knowledge of electronic sports or their organizations with millions of dollars in sponsors, then you probably shouldn't be getting yourself involved in the first place. That is all I will say on this matter. DarthBotto talk•cont 00:15, 09 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- keep There are some sources [1] looks to be a good source, [2] is in passing in a RS, [3] is pretty detailed and the source appears reliable (not certain) and [4] includes a number of foreign language sources which might be useful. Hobit (talk) 00:29, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete the article makes lofty claims which the meagre sources would seem to disprove. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 21:30, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Erb? I was unaware that was a reason for deletion. In any case, what lofty claims? "the organization is known as being the premiere North American electronic sports organization, boasting highly successful players across each competitive genre." As near as I can tell replacing "the" with "a" would solve any such problems. Could you explain? Hobit (talk) 23:06, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- In order to solve that problem, I think you'd need to change "a" to "the" as you suggested, but also you'd need to remove the word "premiere" (as this is just puffery), as well as everything after the comma, namely: "boasting highly successful players across each competitive genre". That would reduce it to "...the organization is known as being a North American electronic sports organization." Having corrected the POV problems, then you'd just need to provide a reliable source which corroborates that statement. SnottyWong speak 23:15, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Yep, Snottywong nailed it. Since "the premiere North American electronic sports organization" is certainly NOT this one, and that's about the only claim to notability in the article. There's really nothing left for the article to stand on. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 02:02, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Other than meeting WP:N you mean? Hobit (talk) 08:31, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Erb? I was unaware that was a reason for deletion. In any case, what lofty claims? "the organization is known as being the premiere North American electronic sports organization, boasting highly successful players across each competitive genre." As near as I can tell replacing "the" with "a" would solve any such problems. Could you explain? Hobit (talk) 23:06, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) Reach Out to the Truth 04:12, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Slight Keep - multiple hits at Joystiq. Not much individually, but collectively may be enough. --Teancum (talk) 15:36, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Those are all just short advertisements and press releases. None of them are significant coverage (as required by WP:GNG). SnottyWong confer 17:30, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Hobit's sources. No objection to de-peacockifying it in the process of adding sources, of course. Jclemens (talk) 20:26, 17 October 2010 (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.