Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Recognition of eSports as a form of legitimate sports

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. Per the reasoning of Sandstein and SpinningSpark. Randykitty (talk) 16:37, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Recognition of eSports as a form of legitimate sports[edit]

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

What the heck is a manifesto doing in mainspace? For pete's sake. There are also unsourced health claims here. Jytdog (talk) 08:56, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to something less definitive, e.g. Contention that eSports is a sport or Arguments for eSports as a real sport. Reliable sources like The Mail Online ("Why esports ARE real sports"), Forbes ("Are (sic) Esports A Real Sport?", The Guardian ("eSports are real sports. It’s time for the Olympic video games") and CNN ("Seven-figure salaries, sold-out stadiums: Is pro video gaming a sport?") and at least one paper ("Recognizing ESports as a Sport") all yak about it. Afd is not for cleanup. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:56, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Merge anything useful to eSports. I didn't notice there's already a section there. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:09, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 10:33, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The subject clearly meets WP:GNG, but it has been in a poor state since its creation. I feel like it should either be cleaned up or moved to draft space. I disagree with Clarityfiend's rename ideas and prefer the current title, though Recognition of eSports and eSports and sports would be reasonable alternatives, I suppose. ~Mable (chat) 10:35, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge - As much as this passes GNG, I don't feel like this article really adds anything that couldn't simply be added to eSports. The article currently reads more like an WP:ESSAY to me. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:12, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe much merger would be necessary because eSports#Classification as a sport is already looking better than the article currently under discussion. ~Mable (chat) 06:01, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rename I think that Athletic legitimacy of eSports might be a more WP:CONCISE name, but the justification for deletion is rather weak. It seems like the nom just saw the name and jumped at the chance to delete without looking at the merits._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 11:47, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to esports. per WP:NOTESSAY and WP:CONTENTFORK. We don't create stand-alone Wikipedia articles to debate one side of an argument. Could use some good trimming in a merge too - there's a bunch of unsourced or rambling prose in there. Sergecross73 msg me 12:25, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Merge on the grounds that esports is too big (99,420 bytes), so if it was merged something else would have to be split off. Prince of Thieves (talk) 14:06, 22 March 2018 (UTC) — Striking per WP: SOCKSTRIKE. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 02:03, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's not really a legitimate reason - the article in question is a mere 11,000 bytes itself, and should be trimmed down in a merge. It can be fit in. Sergecross73 msg me 15:09, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What Sergecross73 said. Also, a split may be necessary anyway. WP:Article length suggests splitting off separate articles if an article's length exceeds 50,000 bytes.--Martin IIIa (talk) 15:15, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) Articles should be around 50,000 bytes, so my point is that esports is already too big, merging is not going to help that, if this passes WP:GNG, some effort should be made to keep it as a split article. Prince of Thieves (talk) 15:17, 22 March 2018 (UTC) — Striking per WP: SOCKSTRIKE. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 02:03, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're arguing that we should not merge solely to avoid the need for a split, while admitting that a split is going to be needed anyway? That really makes no sense.--Martin IIIa (talk) 15:22, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~If we merge this, what would you split? Prince of Thieves (talk) 15:23, 22 March 2018 (UTC)~~ — Striking per WP: SOCKSTRIKE. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 02:03, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Moving back a bit, you're kind of taking the wrong angle here - "The target is too big for a merge" isn't going to default into keeping the article. If anything, it'd default into deleting the article likely, or merging it into a different esports spinout. So right here, right now, at this AFD, we should probably be debating things more like this subject's independent notability, content forks, POV issues, article scope, etc. Sergecross73 msg me 15:29, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

At the moment it is a mess. If renamed, rewritten, rescoped and made into esports as recognised sport or something, it could standalone. If it can't standalone, then I can't see how the main article benefits from the merge, deletion would be a perfectly good option if no one wants this article, esports already has a perfectly good section on what is essentially this subject. Prince of Thieves (talk) 15:49, 22 March 2018 (UTC) — Striking per WP: SOCKSTRIKE. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 02:03, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well I'd fully support deletion as well if its already covered in the partent article, I just figured that advocating for that would be less likely to garner consensus, and more likely confuse the issue. If you start focusing on delete, people will start up with their "but there are sources" rather than focusing on more WP:NOT-related issues present here. Similarly, if you advocate redirect, then everyone's going to start arguing if that ridiculously worded title is really a plausible search term. Both are already starting above honestly. I just believe that this article should not be a stand alone article in its current shape/scope - its better to be covered as a part of esports itself. Sergecross73 msg me 16:16, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge back to eSports per other merge comments. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 18:54, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Do not merge Essays are almost impossible to merge into a well developed parent article without messing up the target. It will just be another old Category:Articles to be merged after an Articles for deletion discussion that will eventually be redirected. Don't care if it is deleted or redirected, but it should not be kept. AIRcorn (talk) 01:51, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention this is already covered their. AIRcorn (talk) 01:53, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, do not merge. To the extent this is not an essay, it is a content fork of eSports which covers this topic adequately. Sandstein 13:38, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:CONTENTFORK and WP:POVTITLE and Sandstein's rationale. SpinningSpark 15:20, 30 March 2018 (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.