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. Ja, usually GNG trumps other notability criteria and not the other way around. Policy based criteria such as BLP or OR trump GNG but notability isn't a policy and policies are not at issue here.
Jo-Jo Eumerus (
talk,
contributions)
19:17, 29 October 2017 (UTC)reply
His game may be notable but there's nothing to show that he himself is. The only significant/reliable mention is the article in The Southern but that alone does not satisfy
WP:BIO, the impact of the game is not significant enough for notability by association. ZXCVBNM (
TALK)08:43, 15 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Hi, while writing this I found some good TV sources on him in the Midwest. I didn’t include them because I thought the
Wired (magazine) interview and game-specific sources were a better fit.
I do think those sources are a better fit for proving notability. I'll defer to others' opinion on this as I haven't encountered this sort of case where local news is used to prove notability rather than the game journalist press, but it does seem more reliable than the previous sources.ZXCVBNM (
TALK)05:12, 18 October 2017 (UTC)reply
WP:GNG is not the sole criteria for biographies. Per
WP:CREATIVE, "The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work". While he is mentioned in plenty of local news articles, they don't give an indication that his work is well known and significant, besides a mention of being part of GDC. I don't see a pressing reason for him to have an article as opposed to the game that he developed, it seems
WP:TOOSOON.ZXCVBNM (
TALK)13:26, 25 October 2017 (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.
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. Ja, usually GNG trumps other notability criteria and not the other way around. Policy based criteria such as BLP or OR trump GNG but notability isn't a policy and policies are not at issue here.
Jo-Jo Eumerus (
talk,
contributions)
19:17, 29 October 2017 (UTC)reply
His game may be notable but there's nothing to show that he himself is. The only significant/reliable mention is the article in The Southern but that alone does not satisfy
WP:BIO, the impact of the game is not significant enough for notability by association. ZXCVBNM (
TALK)08:43, 15 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Hi, while writing this I found some good TV sources on him in the Midwest. I didn’t include them because I thought the
Wired (magazine) interview and game-specific sources were a better fit.
I do think those sources are a better fit for proving notability. I'll defer to others' opinion on this as I haven't encountered this sort of case where local news is used to prove notability rather than the game journalist press, but it does seem more reliable than the previous sources.ZXCVBNM (
TALK)05:12, 18 October 2017 (UTC)reply
WP:GNG is not the sole criteria for biographies. Per
WP:CREATIVE, "The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work". While he is mentioned in plenty of local news articles, they don't give an indication that his work is well known and significant, besides a mention of being part of GDC. I don't see a pressing reason for him to have an article as opposed to the game that he developed, it seems
WP:TOOSOON.ZXCVBNM (
TALK)13:26, 25 October 2017 (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.