- List of League of Legends champions (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)
I attempted write an article on a similar topic (League of Legends champion), (now in draft-space here but content was immediately redirected by an admin due to being perceived as being a recreation of an article which had been deleted in the past. The reality is that it's not. Regardless it's been five years since the older article was deleted and it's since accumulated much media attention. @Salvidrim!: has declined to allow the link to be created so I've made a listing here.--Prisencolin (talk) 01:13, 17 July 2020 (UTC) Prisencolin (talk) 01:13, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- There's a lot of issues going on with this, not the least of which is asking for a review of a 4 year old AFD, which has already been reviewed by DRV, though I believe he was instructed to do that. Prisencolin was given a copy of the original article after it was deleted by AFD as a user draft, under a restriction it must go through review at DRV and he could not move it to mainspace. As with the last DRV, he hasn't notified the deleting admin, so am pinging @Sandstein: and also @Cryptic: who restored the draft. He did not follow the agreed to instructions and submitted the draft to AFC in the last couple weeks, where it was declined on notability grounds by @AngusWOOF:. After that, Prisencolin began shopping around, including asking Salvidrim who had salted the article after the user draft was restored, and asking the AFC Helpdesk. When those avenues didn't get traction, he reformatted the article as being about the general "concept" of a LoL champion. This is a gamecruft subject that is in no way independent of the parent topic. Prisencolin has a history of attempting to make League of Legend cruft articles that are in my opinion becoming disruptive. Please see the page move and contribution history of Runeterra, another LoL in-universe topic he's trying to game past AFD by "redefining the scope" of the article after moving and round robining and splitting it during an active AFD discussion. Note that the new version of this article has been returned to draft space and submit to AFC again. -- ferret (talk) 01:39, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- The article is ENTIRELY different in is content so I wouldn't even attempt to consider it the same article. I just listed it here in an attempt to assuage any concerns that it was a a recreated of previously deleted content.--Prisencolin (talk) 03:45, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Why are we having a DRV on a 4-year-old AFD? Why not just propose it on the talk page and get consensus as to whether it's worth splitting off again? Has the list of champions become notable? Have characters been given merchandise? Been used in other media besides the game itself? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:11, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I was told to take this to DRV if I wanted to recreate the content, so that's what I'm doing. I just waited this long as I believe now is the right time to recreate the content in partial. I didn't bother bringing it up on the talk page of the League of Legends article because I knew most of the other editors on that page would be irrationally opposed to this new article so I wanted to bring it here for a secondary perspective. The answer is yes to all of your other questions.--Prisencolin (talk) 05:08, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, pinging Cryptic, Sandstein admins involved. Also going to give notice on WP:VG AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 05:47, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @AngusWOOF: Speaking of merchandise, Louis Vuitton made a t-shirt with a League of Legends character image.[1] If that doesn't demonstrate cultural importance I don't know what does.--Prisencolin (talk) 10:18, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I would decline the restoration request because it does not make clear how exactly the new draft addresses the issues identified in the AfD. Also, the content of the draft does not match its title: this is not in fact a list of all the game's characters. Instead, it covers various aspects of the game and gameplay. Such content (if it is relevant) belongs into the article about the game itself. Sandstein 06:37, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Sandstein: The characters are also no longer just part of the game, the IP has expanded to other forms of media. This necessitates content to be on a separate article.--Prisencolin (talk) 08:30, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- No - No. No ✉ 06:42, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- That wasn't particularly helpful, so I'll answer the "why" before you even ask: after years of trying to get this list of LoL champions created, several AfDs, a userfication, talk page messages, helpdesk messages, AfC declines, you're now bringing a years-old AfD to DRV... to try and get greenlight to mainspace another deleted draft about, in essence, the same crufty topic? Prisencolin, you're not just beating a WP:DEADHORSE, you're perpetrating genocide on generations of equines with violence of a heretofore unseen magnitude.
 Stop . Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 07:03, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Salvidrim: I'm not a fan of you using charged terminology like "genocide" here. Consider the connotation of what the analogies you use before making any more reductio ad absurdum arguments.--Prisencolin (talk) 15:49, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Procedural close Doing a DRV of a years-old deletion is probably not allowed, per WP:POINT. The original list got deleted for being fancruft, so I wouldn't oppose recreation - as a draft - and properly sourced. As for your current draft, I don't see how the concept of a champion in League is notable.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 07:15, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Zxcvbnm: Have you seen the article? There are numerous reliable sources discussing the very topic of a "concept".--Prisencolin (talk) 07:31, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't appreciate the WP:BLUDGEONing here. I could explain why I don't think it's notable, but I don't think anything will ever convince you, so I won't even bother. That's a sign you already lost the argument, because nobody is willing to even engage.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 17:15, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Zxcvbnm: I think you may want to look again, an AFC reviewer just commented on this thread and states that that not only does the the topic likely meet WP:GNG but also has "better sourcing than 90%" of articles.--Prisencolin (talk) 17:38, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I implore everyone to consider the circumstances which have led this topic to become more notable in the past few years since the last AFD in 2015:
- League of Legends has expanded beyond a single game to become an entire franchise and with multimedia installments. Characters have been featured in other games, real life musical groups, comics, an soon a animated television series. Information existing on the page for just League of Legends is inadequate as the information also pertains to Legends of Runeterra and Teamfight Tactics.
- In particular, the virtual K-Pop group K/DA, which has an article on Wikipedia, has been praised for one fictional character’s rapping ability, even by those who aren’t fans of the original game. Having a page on information on champions broad will provide necessary context for understanding the information on this article.
- Within the game itself, over 30 new champions released, with most of them receiving significant press coverage in the most widely read gaming publications like IGN, PC Gamer, Escapist, Polygon etc. (the following links are for each of the 30 releases:[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][ This coverage even transcends routine coverage such as controversies over the design of one character.[10]
--Prisencolin (talk) 08:27, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Look, at this point I'm not going to copy-paste every link posted because it's all the same gameplay material. There is barely anything encyclopedic about the characters in the least. Creation, inspiration, development, reception. Like you said, "League of Legends Dev Responds to Complaints of Oversexualizing Its Newest Character" is the only item that "transcends routine coverage". soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 09:31, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Soetermans: Mashable did a story on a pair of champion releases in 2017, which was significant because no other champions had been A) Lovers in the story and B)able to give each other specific in-game buffs.[2]
- @Soetermans: It literally doesn't matter if the source was written as part of a game guide if it's been determined to be reliable. That's not what WP:GAMEGUIDE says. In any case, those are also related to character announcements. Besides, don't take it from me, another editor has literally said those kinds of articles are admissible for notability in this past discussion. Regardless you also have to consider the characters' notoriety from recent musical groups, comics, tv series and other media. --Prisencolin (talk) 09:43, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- +1, the draft article is essentially WP:SYNTH. It takes a large amount of minor mentions of various champions which do not prove that the concept of champions as shown in League of Legends was ever individually notable, the character select idea has been used throughout gaming history.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 09:42, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I wholly disagree that it's synthesis. But to get another perspective I've posted the draft the OR noticeboard.--Prisencolin (talk) 09:47, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Zxcvbnm: As far as I can tell I’ve made no original statements in the article, with every statement being summarized from its sources. Juxtaposition is not synthesis either per WP:SYNTH, and there’s no concern of WP:FRANKENSTEIN being build since the League of Legends champions being discussed in the various sources are indisputably the same category of League of Legends champions.—-Prisencolin (talk) 17:10, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per Salvidrim. Most of those articles Prisencolin linked to above are just announcement articles or skill explanation guides, nether of which really give a hero any real notability (and when you want to list every one of the 100+ heroes in the game in an article, that becomes a problem). ~ Dissident93 (talk) 09:34, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose - ferret just about sums it up. Sergecross73 msg me 14:32, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Sergecross73: Most of Ferret's post was an ad hominem attack on my recent edit history while making WP:VAGUEWAVES towards supposed unsuitability of the topic and ignoring new sources that have appeared.--Prisencolin (talk) 15:46, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Procedural close. AFD was over four years ago. If the subject is notable the article can be recreated. Stifle (talk) 14:53, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Stifle: I've been talking to the other editors who've commented here about recreating the article in some form, but they insist it shouldn't be. The link it also salted and requires admin privileges to be created. That's why I listed it here.--Prisencolin (talk) 15:23, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- And it's pretty clear how other people think about it, so let's WP:DROPTHESTICK, huh? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 15:29, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- The only thing that's clear is that you clearly ignore legitimate evidence and sources for this topic's existence, especially for that information that has come out in the last five years. For what reason, either you don't like the topic, maybe you don't like me I can't care to speculate.--Prisencolin (talk) 15:42, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- The process of designing of League of Legends champion was covered by NBC News.[3][4]--Prisencolin (talk) 17:11, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- OK, first of all, IMO, no one should be requiring AfC for anything. Yes I understand why it was here, I just think that's a really horrible thing to force someone to do. Secondly, yes the AfD is old and yes folks have been a pain in the rear about it. But this is way over the GNG bar with plenty of academic coverage (mainly on gender). Not having this article would be akin to not having an article on the various Pokemon or even the various positions in soccer (which I just assumed existed as I typed that and am glad to see does exist). I don't see how anyone can make an argument that the draft doesn't meet the GNG. And while I can see a WP:GAMEGUIDE argument, I don't think it applies here. In any case, I'm a AFC reviewer and I'll be happy to approve the draft--it's got more and better sources than 90% of our articles. Hobit (talk) 17:14, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Not considering the actual notability of the article here, but addressing the replies above: As I understand, G4 doesn't have a time limit on it, so the AfD being 4 years ago doesn't really matter, it should still be possible to delete per G4. What does matter is if the article is substantially the same. If the argument here is correct, then the sourcing at least should be far better. If it isn't, G4 continues to apply. If it is, then recreation should probably be permitted, as we usually do, even if the new sources might still be unacceptable, and then sent off to AfD. I don't see how this DRV is POINTy either - the title is salted. This would seem the appropriate venue to have that reviewed (per WP:DRVPURPOSE). Yes, there's point 13 of the "DRV is not" criteria, but that applies for uncontroversial undeletions of very old articles, where new sourcing has arisen since. This clearly isn't uncontroversial, since there's still preferences expressed here for keeping that page deleted, so I think this falls into DRV's purview per #3 of what DRV is. Finally, I agree those moves by the editor requesting DRV, regarding Runeterra, are problematic. And I'm assuming Draft:League of Legends champion the article which is requested to be created at List of League of Legends champions. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 18:58, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per Ferret, Salvidrim, and Soetermans. There's a good reason this article was deleted before, as it lacks any notability. Game announcements and press releases don't automatically make something notable; Wikipedia is not a news outlet and none of them offer any critical analysis. Considering that this got deleted four years ago and nothing has changed regarding its notability, I see no reason why it needs an article. The BLUDGEONing and weird accusations coming from the nom is also nothing short of ridiculous, and shows how little they care for site policy and WP:GNG. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 19:24, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Namcokid47: Please see some of the academic writing on the subject I and another editor listed a few comments up as well. Also none of the those sources should considered press releases because they all came from news organizations, secondary sources.--Prisencolin (talk)
- Oppose I don't believe in being bureaucratic, and if someone picks a reasonable forum, we should discuss it. But now that we're discussing it, even the new draft runs into a lot of the same problems as the old one. There's already a good summary of this in League_of_Legends#Champions and I don't see what this new article adds. That probably explains why there isn't much secondary coverage that offers more detail than what we already have. Shooterwalker (talk) 20:02, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Sandstein: Can you temporarily restore the deleted article from the time of its deletion so editors can view it please? Thanks.—-Prisencolin (talk) 19:59, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- He can't. It was already restored and moved to your userspace, and then to draftspace, by you. It was already restored, under an agreement it would not go live without this review occurring. Consensus seems pretty clear. -- ferret (talk) 20:21, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- In this case would the content as of September 2015 be temporarily forked under the page title List of League of Legends champions? I believe it is this one.--Prisencolin (talk) 01:07, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Why would it need restored to mainspace? Anyone can view that diff. I think you're missing that many have already seen both forms. Content isn't the question, but the topic of LoL champions as an independent subject from LoL itself. -- ferret (talk) 01:09, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- In regards whether it's an independent subject, that's a question for AFD not here. The burden of proof for article recreation is primarily whether it is significantly different or improved compared to before. As of now I don't see anyone here prove the opposite yet.--Prisencolin (talk) 04:41, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- The concept of League of Legends champion design was covered by Tribeca News, an outlet that's only tangentially related to video games.[1] I don't see how you can't consider this concept as independently notable from League of Legends itself.--Prisencolin (talk) 00:16, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- If this isn't a G4 - I can't tell - it should be restored and taken to AfD. Many of the arguments here are AfD arguments, and my assumption is that it's not a G4. SportingFlyer T·C 22:41, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
|
