Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/StrongSide (video game player)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. This article is sitting in a little bit of a grey area with respect to notability. The argument to keep rests on the subject meeting the guideline at Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Sports_personalities. However, that section is essentially a summary of WP:NSPORTS, not an independent guideline; so I'm going to defer to what NSPORTS has to say, which is: "subjects of standalone articles should meet the General Notability Guideline. The guideline on this page provides bright-line guidance to enable editors to determine quickly if a subject is likely to meet the General Notability Guideline". If that's what we apply here, notability clearly is not demonstrated, and so I am closing this as "delete". If people want to haggle over the potentially ambiguous differences in those pages, this isn't the place. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:36, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

StrongSide (video game player) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This has gone through two previous AfDs, neither with any clear consensus. I'm inclined to argue that Cavanaugh is not notable due to a lack of significant sources about him specifically; in searching for materials I found some more prominent coverage in sources like [1][2] but I don't think they rate being 'independent' (he was signed with an MLG umbrella team, and he worked at Prima right around the time of the interview.) As such, leaving aside the question of whether he'd meet WP:ATHLETE, I don't think he meets WP:GNG as required. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 22:02, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:05, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Dream Focus 16:06, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Reading through the past two AFD, I'd like to point out that Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Sports_personalities is clearly met: "A sportsperson is presumed to be notable if the person has actively participated in a major amateur or professional competition". [3] and elsewhere do mention him being in these tournaments, notable professional gaming teams he has been on, all of which have their own articles by the way, and he is mentioned elsewhere although briefly. Dream Focus 17:30, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • The second part of that notability guideline is and so is likely to have received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. There's no indication of significant coverage of the article subject alone, hence why I listed it. (I'd also frankly argue about applying "major" to most professional esports competitions, as until recently and still for many games they do not generate anything like the attention and press of 'traditional' sports. What's "major" for esports would not be considered "major" for a cricket player or football player, etc.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 15:01, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • The "presumed to be notable" is all that matters. As for how popular video game tournaments are, [4] " The 2018 Mid-Season Invitational tournament, a League of Legends tournament hosted by Germany and France, was the most watched eSports event, with a recorded 60 million unique viewers." Not sure how many people watched the Halo tournaments though. But you can't just dismiss it claiming it can't compare with traditional sports. Dream Focus 15:55, 20 August 2019 (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.