Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Happy (video gamer)


 * 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. ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  06:36, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Happy (video gamer)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

An eSports player, not clear that he passes WP:GNG and has had a notability tag since May. There's a huge pile of sources, but they're all from the same websites and none of them are reliable sources, and most of them are heavily dedicated to niche interest. The vast majority of content in the article is detail about his eSports activities with a ton of red links. He has won a couple of competitions but I am not satisfied that this alone asserts notability. KaisaL (talk) 14:20, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:48, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:49, 4 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete - As the nomination alludes to, the sourcing is a bit misleading, with most sources not looking to be an WP:RS, or barely mention the subject himself at all - passing mentions. Sergecross73   msg me  20:49, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. Star player of a team that won two CS:GO Majors and reached the final of another, the highest level in the esport. Gets coverage in mainstream sources like L'Express: . Patar knight - chat/contributions 22:49, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
 * While I don't think this is a bad argument, I note having translated the link you've given that he's one of a team being interviewed and there's no actual write-up about him. This doesn't confer his individual notability, at best it supports that of the team and potentially merging any viable information into that article. KaisaL (talk) 23:13, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Combined with widely available reports reporting from sources likely ESPN, Daily Dot, and other esports, plus his stature as the captain of a former #1 team in one of the biggest esports in the world would be enough IMHO for it to meet WP:BASIC. Patar knight - chat/contributions 00:10, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * "Likely" ESPN etc? In short, you don't actually know one way or another?  Sorry, but qualifying sources providing "significant coverage" to the subject (as opposed to casual mentions among a bunch of other guys) is what meets the GNG, not these WP:ROUTINE fleeting mentions, and if you think that L'Express link constitutes qualifying coverage, I urge you to review WP:GNG.  Failing anyone providing those sources -- as opposed to blithely assuming they must exist -- make mine Delete.   Ravenswing   13:48, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Just like it's likely you would find extensive coverage of a major sports figure in publications covering that sport, it's likely you would find extensive coverage of a major e-sports figure in publications covering that e-sport. A Google News search of Happy EnVyUs CSGO gets 636 hits and a Google News search of Happy LDLC CSGO gets 176]. Many of these are in passing, but there is enough in-depth coverage specifically focused on Happy (some examples of which I've added to the article) to pass WP:BASIC, which says that even if there is a lack of sources with deep coverage, extensive non-trivial coverage by multiple reliable sources can also be used to demonstrate notability.
 * The point of using the L'Express source is that people tend to vote to delete esports players no matter how much coverage they get from reliable, e-sports coverage, if mainstream sources don't cover them (see: Articles for deletion/FREAKAZOiD. Since a mainstream source like L'Express chose to interview him, it brings legitemacy to the idea that maybe he should have an article. Patar knight - chat/contributions 02:53, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * What brings legitimacy to a person having an article is receiving significant coverage in reliable sources. I really don't give a damn whether someone's name is dropped in the Times of London or the Washington Post -- if he does not receive significant coverage, then the sources do not support the notability of the subject.  Period.   Ravenswing   03:51, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * My arguments are also per Ravenswing. When significant reliable coverage dedicated to the individual (not their team) is raised I am happy to consider - hence my shift to a weak delete on Allu's concurrent AFD. KaisaL (talk) 13:41, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep, coverage in reliable sources as well as mainstream, presumably print sources like L'Express. The L'express article is a interview with Happy and teammate KennyS, and even though it's not entirely about him the fact that it's a mainstream print news magazine means it gives the subject a lot more merit.--Prisencolin (talk) 21:29, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * A mainstream news article that makes it clear that Happy's play for EnVyUs had made them arguably the best team in the world at the time. Patar knight - chat/contributions 02:31, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 01:26, 12 July 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; Music1201  talk  14:44, 19 July 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: final relist &mdash; Music1201  talk  17:57, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; Music1201  talk  17:57, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. There is not enough in sources to prove independent notability outside of a team. ZettaComposer (talk) 15:02, 28 July 2016 (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.