Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edi Birsan


 * 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   no consensus.  MBisanz  talk 02:17, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Edi Birsan

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I don't see the notability in writing some articles about Diplomacy. Even "inventing the Lepanto opening and the Sealion" don't seem notable enough to me. NuclearWarfare  ( Talk ) 03:51, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 09:15, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I would consider being the first world champion of a widely played game to be notable, but I'm having trouble finding references to back it up. Maybe my google fu is out of whack. - Mgm|(talk) 12:22, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete and consider Lepanto opening for deletion as it lays claim to an opening used at least five years before the "inventor"'s claim.   Non-notable and self-published.  Collect (talk) 13:16, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * No self-published. GabrieL (talk) 20:30, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:03, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep The topic is notable and, even it were not, there would be better alternatives to deletion per our policies WP:BEFORE and WP:PRESERVE. The article just needs improvement per WP:IMPERFECT and so I shall do some work upon it.  Colonel Warden (talk) 15:48, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Edi Birsan here: I find it rather strange being drawn into a page on myself... I was rather surprised by a Wikipedia reference let alone a debate on its inclusion...but a few points The Lepanto Article is most notable for being the article that popularized both that specific opening in the game of Diplomacy, but more importantly it was the article that started an entire trend in the Diplomacy Hobby or writing about openings.  That the article was written in 1971 and that I had used the opening in face to face games in 1966 is irrelevant.  That someone may have stumbled on the specific moves independently may or may not have happened, what is important is what the effect on the play of the game the article had. As for being the first world champion, this was the reference for the win in the invitational game in 1971 numbered BC and referred to subsequently. There are other aspects to my life in the Diplomacy Hobby that people may want to go to if that is relevant and can be found at: http://www.diplom.org/NADF/edi.htm I could also sit down and increase greatly the references to articles I have written on the game of Diplomacy, or tournaments run/won/started/supported or organizations etc  if that is of interest. However, my life is more than just Diplomacy, though that seems to be the focus here which in itself is rather amusing.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by EdiBirsan (talk • contribs) 16:30, 28 January 2009 (UTC)  — EdiBirsan (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * The fact remains that the MITSGS members played many games of Diplomacy, and the main openings (depending on number of players) were fairly well discussed and thought out well before your publication. So much so that a variant based on the Avalon-Hill grid system to extend the possiblilities of Diplomacy was designed and played in order to make the game less well determined. Collect (talk) 20:03, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Welcome to Wikipedia Edi. Your life, like any Diplomacy player's life, is much more than Diplomacy of course but I thought it best to have more of what you're known for than who you are in keeping with the general trend of articles on people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sioraf (talk • contribs) 2009-01-29 17:56:00 — Sioraf (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Wikipedia doesn't need articles written and published by you. What Wikipedia needs are multiple, in-depth, articles written about you, that are written and published by people independent of you, and that are written and published by people with good reputations for fact checking and accuracy.  Sources!  Sources! Sources! Uncle G (talk) 06:57, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * KEEP Edi is one of the greatest players of all time and has been playing for over half a century. Sioraf (talk) 17:57, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * That argument has no basis in our policies and guidelines. Verifiability, No original research, Notability, and Deletion policy are the most applicable policies and guidelines.  Not a one of them lists "Sioraf's personal, subjective, opinion is that this person is great." as a criterion for anything, let alone inclusion or exclusion.  Please make an argument that actually holds water.  Notability is not subjective.  Sources!  Sources! Sources! Uncle G (talk) 06:57, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm French player of Diplomacy, Edi Birsan is probably the most famous personality of Diplomacy game and one of the greatest players : in the ranking of all time ("World Palmares Evaluation"), Edi Birsan is the 3rd player of all time : and the 1st of the English spoken countries. I don't vote here because if Edi Birsan is very notable in Diplomacy World, I don't know it's enough for notability in Wikipedia.GabrieL (talk) 21:09, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It's irrelevant for Wikipedia, so the question of whether it is enough doesn't even apply. Notability has nothing to do with fame, and everything to do with whether the world has seen fit to independently document this person's life and works in depth in trustworthy published works, so that a verifiable, full, encyclopaedia biographical article, free from original research and non-neutrality, can be written based upon that documentation as sources.  Sources!  Sources! Sources!  Uncle G (talk) 00:32, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 06:59, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

- 	Consensus! Consensus! Consensus! - 	Sioraf (talk) 13:24, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * weak Delete At present, I am not quite sure that accomplishment in playing this game is generally considered notable, and ditto for writing articles about it. If fancruft means anything, this is fancruft . DGG (talk) 18:54, 31 January 2009 (UTC) Revised DGG (talk) 09:46, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Uncle G, you're making the common mistake of thinking that you can understand my brain just by what I put down in words. It's not an accurate Empirical to a priori translation. Edi Birsan is considered by most Diplomacy players to be among the best ever.


 * Delete Abject lack of independant sources and a lot of self-promotion. Sources have been found, but still no real claim for notability. Edward321 (talk) 02:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment I have cleaned up the article to format it and add a solid citation to a published book. Colonel Warden (talk) 09:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * what exactly does the book say about him? How much pace does it give him? DGG (talk) 00:15, 2 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment Thanks for finding sources, but I'm not sure that being 1 of 5 game designers of a notable card game and 1 of 2 designers of a non-notable card game makes him notable. Edward321 (talk) 16:48, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

— GabrieL (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Because I am French: I write on French Wikipedia (3,000 contributions on French Wikipedia) before English Wikipedia. GabrieL (talk) 19:22, 3 February 2009 (UTC) — Goffandrew (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep, after sources and "wikification", I vote for keeping articles. GabrieL (talk) 20:30, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, The only question is if any Diplomacy player is notable. If we have agreement that some are, then Edi Birsan is certainly notable. I would argue that facts such as whether or not he invented the lepanto are controversies that should be in the article and in fact add to the notability of Edi rather than take away from it. I think that the article requires improvement, more sources and perhaps a neutral approach... but certainly Edi is as notable as Diplomacy players get. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goffandrew (talk • contribs) 21:19, 4 February 2009 (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.