Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dureal


 * 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. JohnCD (talk) 19:58, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Dureal

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Notability questions - does the number 1 player in Jedi Knight constitute a sufficient claim to notability? Are there multiple non-trivial mentions to support such a claim? Article is sourced to one website as of this nomination. Syrthiss (talk) 14:43, 10 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete WikiProject Video Games' only word on what is or isn't notable is if the article can pass GNG. So, there appears to be no inherent notability.  The references in the article are all primary via ESL.  This type of ref is good for stats, but doesn't help with nobility as secondary sources are required.  Also, Dureal gets edit privileges on the ESL site, but I'm not sure what he can or can't edit.  The ESL is not a major video game circuit where the major leagues have prize purses of over $500,000.  ESL is more for individual amateur players.  So, we have a player with no reliable, independent secondary sources, iffy-reliable primary sources and playing in a "bush league". Bgwhite (talk) 06:27, 11 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete The twin claims to notability here seem to be his status as the best Jedi Knight player and being the administrator of ESL. There is no source for the claim of best JK player and the ESL is apparently not notably enough for its own article so by extension its administrator is not notable. Eastshire (talk) 17:14, 11 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:55, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:56, 11 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - Lack of third party coverage, doesn't meet the WP:GNG. ("ESL" sources don't help establish that.) Sergecross73   msg me   13:17, 15 May 2012 (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.