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. There does appear to be a fairly strong case for merging here, although at this point I would prefer discussion on that matter to continue on the talk page (or that of the intended target). Shereth 20:43, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mousesports[edit]

non-notable organization. no coverage in reliable third party sources per googlenews search. only source is the organizations own web site. article appears to be for self promotional/vanity reasons -- The Red Pen of Doom 12:07, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

delete as per my nomination. -- The Red Pen of Doom 12:11, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not necessary for the nominator to comment in the fashion above. It's assumed that the nominator supports deletion of the article. (For future reference.) MuZemike (talk) 17:15, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Google News Results- your statement is obviously blatant and unverified. Mousesports has numerous sponsors and partners and cannot be considered to be lacking attention worthy of Wikipedia. DarthBotto_talk•cont 19:45, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

comment not sure what happened with the pre-load language - can someone fix this? -- The Red Pen of Doom 12:11, 8 July 2008 (UTC) It is now corrected. Thanks. -- The Red Pen of Doom 22:19, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game related deletions. MrKIA11 (talk) 16:26, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to G7 Teams. Looking past WP:GOOGLEHITS which was implied in the nomination, the article does not seem to be written like an article. It seems to be written as a web page, listing the team's current full roster and personnel as well as a history of the team which seems to construe original research. This needs to be cut down and placed within the aforementioned article. MuZemike (talk) 17:09, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Lacks WP:RS to WP:V the notability criteria for WP:GROUP ... the primary sources provided are inadequate because they are not sufficiently independent of the subject .... Happy Editing! — 151.200.237.53 (talk · contribs) _{00:40, 9 July 2008 (UTC)}[reply]

Keep - There are several GameStar sources per [1], which appears to be reliable enough for our purposes, per GameStar. GameStar is run by IGE, and Mousesports does not appear to have a connection to GameStar, which should satisfy the reliable secondary source requirement as well as that of verifiability. Admittedly, everything is in German, but neither WP:GROUP nor the WP:GNG require that sources be in English. --Izno (talk) 18:24, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am inclined to agree with Izno on this subject and I would like to voice my own opinion on this matter and the point of view that I see it. Mousesports has been in existance since 2002 and has gained notoriety in the subject of eSports matches. This page is a valuable asset for the G7 Teams as are the other pages on G7 teams that The Red Pen of Doom seems to have failed to notice. This page has been updated with information taken from its website and the Nihilum website, both eSport giants. I cannot edit this page in the fashion of its gaming achievements, in accordance to the fact that the website it owns is almost entirely in the German language. Also, because TheRedPenOfDoom doubts the authenticity of this page and the fact that the user cannot derive information about its background shows that the user does not have the suitable knowledge to judge this page, as written articles for deletion.

Besides the point, this user has had an entire 63 complaints from other users regarding lacking information, vandalism and biased opinionation. When I asked the administrators to unlock the deleted Nihilum page and create a simple re-direction for the WoW guild/eSports organization, they complied and looked over the Mousesports page. They admitted it was not perfect but allowed it to stay so that I could clean it up, which I have been doing. I find this deletion request ridiculous, because this page has been around for years and the administrators have been watching it. Sure, it may have been on the WikiProject Pro Gaming list, but that was with the purpose to better the page, not delete it! Also, I put that up for others with a better understanding of German to assist me. That is my full opinion on the matter of deleting the Mousesports page. DarthBotto_talk•cont 20:13, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

comment' if you can find reliable, third party, secondary sources and add them to the article to verify your claims of notability, I will withdraw the nomination. Currently, the article still fails Wikipedia guidelines for inclusion-- The Red Pen of Doom 12:33, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 19:21, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete possibly change to keep At the moment the article does not establish verifiability or notability. However, There are verifiable third party sources out there (such as from Blizzard), they just need to be added to the article. If the author goes about doing this, I change my opinion to keep. ~ Ameliorate _{U T C} @ 12:27, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to G7 Teams. Not notable enough for their own article. Although this page taught me why we have a guideline about not overusing flag symbols - useful!Yobmod (talk) 13:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to G7 Teams - lack of significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. PhilKnight (talk) 15:01, 16 July 2008 (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.