Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of League of Legends champions


 * 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. I don't see any point in keeping this discussion open any longer. What we basically have here is a contested PROD with a well based and factual oppose to deletion. No prejudice towards speedy renomination. (non-admin closure)  D u s t i *Let's talk!* 02:59, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

List of League of Legends champions

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

While League of Legends is indeed popular, there is next to no indication of the character significance outside of the actual video game. This page just gives unsatisfactory blurbs about all the characters from this single game, without references, without significance provided and without proper expansion. It was for specifically this reason that List of Dota 2 Heroes was deleted. If the significance of any of the content on this page outside of the game is made apparent, I may reconsider my positioning. Until then, I can't see a good reason why this page should remain. D ARTH B OTTO talk•cont 01:04, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  Ascii002 Talk Contribs GuestBook 01:15, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I should also point out this same article's successful deletion in September of 2010. Like now, it was filled with fancruft and had little encyclopedic substance. D ARTH B OTTO talk•cont 01:16, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 03:54, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:54, 3 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment: I have no official opinion, but I'd be surprised if some of them weren't covered in third-party coverage of LoL expansions. I remember hearing some buzz about Teemo getting nerfed. It generally doesn't take a whole lot to justify a character list. Tezero (talk) 03:05, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Unlike almost all character list articles that come to AfD, a WP:VG/RS search spot check of characters from this list actually gets results. There may not be long entries on each character, but there is sufficient out-of-universe coverage of League characters to warrant a small blurb on each. For what the other-stuff-exists argument was worth, the Dota 2 heroes list does not receive nearly the same depth of coverage in a spot check. The League characters have character spotlights from independent sources and articles about new characters while the Dota characters largely have no coverage at all. Perhaps this will change in time, but I don't think that parity between the two games is a reason in itself for taking it to AfD since each article's scope needs to be judged on its own merits. czar ♔   17:21, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
 * If there are third-party sources to create an adequate list, that would be nice. But, this page really has only used first-party sources and even then, has done so sparingly. I am looking at this not as a comparison to Dota, but as its own article and as it stands, this page really doesn't have information presented that indicates its characters are of significance. D ARTH B OTTO talk•cont 18:27, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I know next to nothing about League, but here are articles I'd consider sigcov for several of a random sampling of characters:
 * Shyvana:
 * Draven:
 * Syndra:
 * See what I mean? There's plenty to justify this list article, which I much prefer to see grow with sources summary style before individual, under-sourced character articles are made. czar ♔   18:58, 6 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  18:32, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  NickGibson3900 Talk 08:27, 16 September 2014 (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.