Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zou Yitian


 * 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. Davewild (talk) 07:40, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Zou Yitian

 * – ( View AfD View log )

non-notable professional gamer. Ridernyc (talk) 05:18, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - Lack of reliable, third party sources. Notability not established. (It's not for any of these "Pro 'Dota' players" or whatever.) Sergecross73   msg me   13:23, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:14, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:23, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:24, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

COMMENT : As he also participated in the Dota 2 The International (with EHOME) and placed 2nd, this could be based on the arguments going on here Articles for deletion/Ivan Antonov (Professional Gamer) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redefining history (talk • contribs) 00:46, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

NOTE: featured in a documentary by cctv5 Redefining history (talk) 00:53, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I once again ask do you have any connection to these players that may cause a conflict of interest? Ridernyc (talk) 00:56, 20 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Note These debates are being discussed off wiki here I now know why so SPA's have been active on these pages. Ridernyc (talk) 01:25, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Please also note the stated intention on that site to re-create these articles after the debate has ended... --Crusio (talk) 06:32, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * "As the argument is going on here, they might delete the pages first until the argument is over. that's why i've saved copies of the wikicodes to post them again when the argument is over." -- Does he really think that will work; that he won't get some form of disciplinary action for such behavior? D arth B otto talk•cont 07:58, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * By argument i mean the argument on notability of esports players, dont get me wrong. Redefining history (talk) 12:12, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I think you're getting things wrong here: if this AfD decides that this person is not notable, then that will not change if some WikiProject would suddenly decide that professional e-sports players are notable. A project can propose something like that, but I sincerely doubt that it would fly. Any recreation of an article deleted after an AfD can be speedily deleted (WP:CSD) and an editor who does this knowing that it is against the rules is almost certain to get blocked from editing. --Crusio (talk) 12:25, 20 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete No evidence of notability or meeting GNG. -DJSasso (talk) 18:42, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete: Lack of significant coverage by reliable third party sources. Niteshift36 (talk) 17:14, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. If there were coverage of this individual in his own right, then maybe a case could be made for notability. But I'm not seeing that here, nor can I find it elsewhere. WP:USUAL applies, however, if the subject becomes more obviously notable down the line. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 19:27, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete: The subject fails the GNG. Are there any reliable sources any proponent wishes to cite, not counting gaming blogs?  It is well-established policy that it is not enough to claim that surely there must be reliable sources out there, somewhere, maybe, possibly, hopefully.  Such sources must be produced. They have not been.  Ravenswing  13:30, 25 October 2011 (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.