Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cyber Evolution

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:17, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cyber Evolution

I originally PRODed this, then the creator removed it. A quick Google turned up no RSes. Deletion suggested. Ipatrol (talk) 00:30, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

Note: for anyone who is not normally involved in article deletion, here are some terms to know:

Consensus A rough agreement among interested editors.
!Vote A bullet statement in a discussion that is not a vote, but a short discussion thread ("!" means "not" in many programming languages).
Source (or citation) A resource (online or otherwise) with signifigant coverage of a topic (WP:CITE).
Notability A standard for inclusion based on how many sources cover an article (WP:N).
Verifyability The ability to base information off of a source (WP:V)
NPOV A policy that requires articles to lack bias (WP:NPOV).
Spam Advertising or advertising-like links that has been inserted into Wikipedia.
Canvassing Informing people on other websites of a discussion in hopes of having users of those sites get involved in the discussion in order to sway it (WP:CANVASS)

there is no reason to remove it, i deleted it by accident --Orgin (talk) 01:10, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - It's just spam. Eeekster (talk) 01:54, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

strong keep - It is not spam it actually exists. www.cevo.com. i have been playing in this league for as long as it has been in operation —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.151.195.6 (talk) 02:31, 25 May 2009 (UTC) — 69.151.195.6 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

~~Keep~~ - The responses of the anon IP are doing nothing to help their cause, but a google news search turns up quite a few sources within the gaming community, including support of "CEVO" from AMD.^{CNN Money} Shadowjams (talk) 03:06, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral - I've changed my mind. The CNN piece is a PR press release, and the other sources are pretty trivial. I also don't have any faith that this article will remain neutral after the AfD is over either. Shadowjams (talk) 20:48, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I would remind users unfamiliar with wikipedia policies to 1) Be civil to other users and they will be likely to listen to you, and 2) wikipedia has specific criteria for inclusion at WP:N. No one doubts the site exists, just question its notability. Shadowjams (talk) 03:05, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I do not see any indication of notability. - TexasAndroid (talk) 03:19, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletion discussions. —TexasAndroid (talk) 03:22, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Texas Android I do not believe that you gave a real look into this. CEVO is very well known within the counter-strike and call of duty community. they are also sponsored by the AMD/ATI corporation as well as slim jim. they also have referenced affiliation with alienware — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.151.195.6 (talk • contribs)

And the sources showing this are... where? Of the four links in the references section, two are to the companies own site, one is to an "in development" page of some sort, and the last makes no mention of the subject, far as I can see. If you want to show that your product is notable, you need to provide reliable, independent, non-trivial references to establish it's notability. Without them, you are likely fighting a losing fight. - TexasAndroid (talk) 03:34, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i don't know if you have ever heard of gotfrag before and i highly doubt it, but gotfrag is a huge news source for the competitive gaming community which is now under ownership of the mlg (major league gaming) [1] gotfrag covers all the cevo professional events for counter-strike: source, counter-strike 1.6, team fortress 2 and cod4. i doubt you used google or any other search engine of any type to look into this. you can also probably search cevo and counter strike on youtube and you will get media coverage.

If you want to save the article, then you need to provide the links that show that this meets the requirements laid out at WP:NOTE or WP:WEB. - TexasAndroid (talk) 03:48, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I'm not sure how google searches aren't turning up sources, but my guess is the searches are for "Cyber Evolution". If you search for "CEVO" there are quite a few google searches up top. If you search google news for the same, you see the CNN Money article, and others, as I indicated. I am not an editor of this article. Shadowjams (talk) 03:48, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CEVO was originally Cyber Evolution and was shortened to CEVO but Cyber Evolution still stands as a name of the llc —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.151.195.6 (talk) 03:50, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - found lots of sources when i searched for it --69.151.197.244 (talk) 04:12, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note - Both 69.151.19*.* IPs come from AT&T's data network (probably wireless) which assigns dynamic IPs. This users's edits have only been to this article and this AfD. Shadowjams (talk) 05:33, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:N as not having the coverage suitable for inclusion. This also seems rather promotional in nature. Them From Space 11:54, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

it is no more promotional than Cyberathlete Professional League, Electronic Sports World Cup, TeamWarfare League —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.151.197.244 (talk) 15:49, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Those articles aren't in the best shape either; see Other stuff exists. Them From Space 11:41, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. Ost (talk) 18:51, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Trivial, at best, coverage in secondary sources. Also, if Google results provide reliable sources as some in this discussion assert, then, for verifiability, said sources need to be shown. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 01:31, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – advertisement. I also cannot find anything reliable that can establish notability of this organization. MuZemike 02:10, 27 May 2009 (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.