Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cyberathlete Professional League
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 keep. Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:34, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Cyberathlete_Professional_League (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Corporation is defunct/non-notable ZBrannigan (talk) 20:05, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment "Defunct" doesn't really matter, but since it's all sourced to its own website, I don't know that it was ever notable. If someone can show that this made news back when it was going on, I'd say keep, but it's not apparent from the article. Mandsford (talk) 21:46, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I will go and clarify by saying that the entire purpose of this article seems to only be to uphold the flow chart of what appears to be winners from various competitions. It all kind of smacks of a self aggrandizing blog. ZBrannigan (talk) 00:51, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 18:45, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - seems fairly notable: a quick search finds plenty of coverage, such as [1], [2], [3], [4] and [5]. Robofish (talk) 20:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Notability is not temporary, and additional sources have been provided by Robofish. Article needs major cleanup though. --Teancum (talk) 12:49, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as per Robofish's sources. SharkD Talk 08:07, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.