Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Justin Wong


 * 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. Tone 16:32, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Justin Wong

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Questionable notability here; was deleted per A7 numerous times (see log) including an A7 about two weeks ago; it was recreated again but it never had a proper deletion discussion. If a consensus is for deletion, then I recommend salting to prevent recreation. –MuZemike 23:12, 16 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions.  –MuZemike 23:12, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:29, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I vote for deletion. You'll see his name (Justin Wong) only in a forum or two, or a comment on YouTube. The guy is famous among the fighting games community, but even so, I rarely see his name on a mainstream media. His name will pop out occasionally when there's a big tournament on a fighting game related news site. I see the need of his page, but there's not enough info with (reliable/credible) sources to make one, this also leaves a doubt about his notability. One interesting thing is the page starter didn't even include the result of the latest tournament Justin Wong just won and all the info he came up has no source (not counting what he took from another article), so his intention is questionable, too.--OshareMajo (talk) 00:21, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * fine, delete it. but not unless you delete daigo's page along with it. there's nothing notable about daigo that's not also notable about justin. in fact, i'll nominate daigo's page too. --Wongba (talk) 06:35, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * also, what is this questionable intent? i'd like to know how i've demonstrated ill intent to any of the parties involved in the article. i didn't include the results of his latest tourney b/c it was a relatively small tournament. if it was evo, i'd be sure to include it. justin has made appearances on the web and cable television and he's the subject of more than one documentary movie. i'm fine with deletion if none of this counts for being notable. but again, i'm only fine with it if daigo's article is deleted also. there's a section of early history that i didn't write that is unsourced, but i was the one who put the label there and tried to rewrite some of it. i've had this page in my own domain space for awhile and had some people ask me to publish it. i was hoping that, you know, this being a wiki and all, some people out in the rest of the world would help flesh it out. if not, i can try to work on it more on my own. salting seems ... uncalled for. the same goes for calling into question my motives. i mean damn... i'm not even sure why i bothered. --Wongba (talk) 06:56, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * he's also got a sponsorship and was a world record holder. --Wongba (talk) 16:03, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

--OshareMajo (talk) 09:44, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments on Wongba
 * Why do you keep comparing him to Daigo? Isn't this article about Justin Wong? This's not about fanboyism, right? If so, we can continue to talk about Justin Wong, purely.
 * Wiki clearly states that you need to cite a good source, and you started the page with none (not even a real content). Shouldn't you prepare all the materials needed before starting a page? If you think he's notable, why no source at all?
 * "damn... i'm not even sure why i bothered." This's not about you (read general advices), it's about why Wiki should have the page. If you feel you're wasting your time, then stop. And since Wiki is open to everyone, you need to listen everyone and accept the majority. You can't take it personal. If this already make you want to give up then I have to question your long term commitment. Will the article be completed? Will there be more contributors than vandals? I already removed a vandalism once.
 * The problem may not be Justin Wong's notability, but his contributors.They failed to convince Wiki. I'm sure many people want their idols to have a Wiki page but cannot write a good one due to the lack of devotion, attitude and writing skill. I'm sure Justin Wong will have his page eventually, the question is when.
 * Comments on Wongba's "sources"
 * Only 2 of 6 are gaming related media. (gametrailers.com, X-Play)
 * 3 of 6 links are like promotional meterials of a group of people. Its purpose is to promote, not represent the view of the third party or the majority. Interestingly, if you see the YouTube comments, many already disagreed with some part of the video.
 * This documentary started as a senior project at a college. And it's for fighting games community. Also, see the YouTube comments for the views of majority.
 * This movie is more like a promotion tool or documentary. The movie isn't even out. Also, please see the comments on its YouTube page.
 * This is a commercial.
 * A world record reported by a small family-owned company blog? That tells how important it is.
 * Weak Keep - the first three sources; sportsjoystickgameproeurogamer seem strong to me, although it might be a case of WP:BLP1E. Article needs vetting for neutrality. The subject is at least verifiable, so a partial merge redirect to a broader article might be appropriate (Evolution Championship Series?) Marasmusine (talk) 10:39, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * comments for OshareMajo. you say this isn't about me, but you've questioned my intentions and credibility twice now. which is it? when wikipedia was still rather new, i started the page on popping. i didn't have a login name and it was only a sentence, but it grew from community contribution to an okay page. i thought that things like that still happened, and i was obviously wrong. as for my sources, when is a source not a source? is a documentary that started as a senior project an invalid source? are derogatory youtube comments a valid reason to consider someone non-notable? i mean just b/c i agree that justin needs a makeover doesn't mean he's not notable, even if it's just for the strong negative emotion he engenders. the commercial was just an example. obviously it's a commercial, but it also means justin is a sponsored player. finally, i was just showing the world record news from the original site. here's another point of view. i came into this thinking people would add contributions and instead get my intentions questioned. i didn't start a page so i could fight and argue. if this is what contributors have to do now to get a page made, then forget it. i'll stick to monitoring the popping page for self promotion. while you're at it osharemajo, why don't you nominate the popping page for deletion and question the intentions of contributors there? --Wongba (talk) 14:21, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * - Believe me, I don't want to argue with you, because it's not worth. Actions speak themselves.
 * - One thing, I didn't nominate Justin's page for deletion, in case you can read. I was invited to discuss by the admin. I voted for deletion because I had to choose, I had to give my opinion. The sources presented and the direction of the page did not convinced me. If the page looked good, I would vote for Keep.
 * - I already gave my opinion, now it's up to majority to decide.
 * - No, I won't nominate any page out of blind or rage. I've never nominated a page before, actually.
 * - I offer not to come to Justin's page again, unless invited by an admin. I hope you agree with this.--OshareMajo (talk) 20:59, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

- Leave Justin Wong's page alone, it just needs to be fixed and not a copy paste job. He deserves to be on here because hes famous among fighters. Justin and Daigo's name are household names to those who play fighting games alot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. Pizza (talk • contribs) 11:09, 23 May 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  14:13, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note – Daigo Umehara's AFD is now moved to Articles for deletion/Daigo Umehara (3rd nomination) (malformed); I've made my comment about that over there. –MuZemike 14:46, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Week keep. Coverage in reliable VG sources is definitely established. Several sources currently included are good. I think this is notable. Not a BLP1E as far as I can tell. — Hellknowz ▎talk 15:24, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * strong delete non-notable Prsaucer1958 (talk) 14:37, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * delete We can verify he exists, but there seems to be no real notability.Slatersteven (talk) 16:01, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete There's coverage in reliable sources, however only the Eurogamer article goes anywhere near significant coverage. Most of the sources listed in the article aren't even directly related to the individual, but rather an event that the individual went to or a game they played, with little-to-no mention of the person. No bias in recreation should more notability come, but it would take a lot more reliable sources for notability to be established.  --Teancum (talk) 13:15, 27 May 2010 (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.