Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Nanney

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. Black Kite (talk) 02:02, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Nanney

Kevin Nanney (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

not my field, but the references look� either thoroughly unreliable or irrelevant to notability DGG ( talk ) 03:02, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 04:12, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 04:12, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 04:12, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as appears to not meet WP:NPERSON. --Rubbish computer 22:38, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and trim: While many of the sources are unreliable, like Reddit and SmashBoards, Daily Dot and Polygon are reliable sources, so no need to delete completely. In addition, I found a source from Bleacher Report ([1]), which is also reliable. Supernerd11 _{Firemind ^_^ Pokedex} 01:45, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Evil_Geniuses#Super_Smash_Bros._Melee (or Apex (tournament series)), for which he is most notable. The current article has a slew of unreliable sources and there isn't much more in-depth in a video game reliable sources custom Google search. The Polygon and Daily Dot articles only mention him in passing (not significant coverage), so it would be undue weight to give him his own article (and fill it with unreliable sources). czar 16:07, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, I believe this nomination is a mistake. I the first note, yes there are unreliable sources, but there are also sources which are reliable Red Bull, Nintendo Enthuiast, Red Bull. Next we should look at this player's acomplishment, he is a three time EVO top 8 finisher. This is the largest fighting game tournament in the world sponsored by Nintendo, Microsoft, and Red Bull so for all purposes he is a professional. He also is the two time champion of Apex the main smash tournament in the world. Valoem ^{talk contrib} 01:26, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nintendo Enthusiast is not a reliable source. And we judge whether eSports individuals receive their own articles by the subject's depth of coverage in reliable, secondary sources (e.g., WP:VG/RS). We'll need to see more of that to justify keeping the article, else there will be no sources with which to write. If they're important, there should be plenty of source material. czar 02:43, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nintendo Enthusiast may not be included on the reliable video game sources list, but it's not included on the unreliable sources list either. In general it seems like the WP:VG/RS does not seem to accommodate esports/competitive gaming very well for whatever reason.--Prisencolin (talk) 03:59, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't need to be on the list—it's a patently unreliable blog with no hallmarks of editorial quality. I would have thought that you've been around long enough to see that (and I don't see how you could argue otherwise...) VG/RS has no issues with eSports/competitive gaming—niche blogs by passionate users do not pass for reliable sources on WP whether or not they pass through the VGRS talk page. czar 04:48, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Many mentions even using the reliable video game sources list custom search (search for "ppmd" instead of Kevin Nanney"). Also well documented on sources not on the list but still reliable.--Prisencolin (talk) 03:59, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: User was canvassed. Passing mentions (plain hits) are not the same as in-depth coverage. czar 04:48, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what's going on here but I definitely wasn't canvassed into the discussion. I've been a regular contributor to this article but I was just a bit tired of dealing with AFDs so so I held off until Valoem asked me to comment.--Prisencolin (talk) 06:18, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment, Czar (talk · contribs) This directly falls under a non-canvassed RfC per:

The talk page of one or more articles, WikiProjects, or other Wikipedia collaborations directly related to the topic under discussion, and is a limited posting with transparency. As noted Kevin Nanney has significant coverage in this reliable source Red Bull and Daily Dot, and Indy Week. Valoem ^{talk contrib} 22:44, 7 October 2015 (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.