Inkipedia talk:Policy/Notability

This is essentially my proposal for the entire debate on competitive pages. Of course, the exact numbers and details can be tweaked, but does anyone have thoughts on this? Nyargleblargle (Talk · Contribs) 22:38, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Bump. Nyargleblargle (Talk · Contribs) 00:20, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

...anybody out there? Nyargleblargle (Talk · Contribs) 15:14, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

This is good. Sorry, I'm just now seeing this. We'd have to talk to Prod to see about adding a new namespace. - 16:05, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

My preference is to avoid creating new namespaces, just in case it conflicts with future extensions. As it is "real world" content, it does somewhat fit within the main scope. However, I'll leave it to the community to decide which direction to go with this. -- Prod (talk) 17:59, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

My general thoughts:

• Given there's not a consensus about putting articles in a custom namespace yet, I'm leaning towards just putting the meta scene in the main namespace.
• Tournament section sounds good. Just put values down rather than weasel words -- 32 teams or more and leave out "high participation".
• Teams section - I would use "top 10% rounded down" as tournaments below 32 teams will not be covered. This gives at least the top 3. 40 or more gives top 4... etc.
• Players - use a separate section. I don't like the criteria that they must be in multiple teams as some players are notable by guiding a team to victory in a major tournament, then may go on to be a tournament organiser and not a participant.
• As a general note, I'd like a citation required system -- can the information be found across different sites? For example, if the tournament was hosted by Squid Boards, I'd expect a link back to there but also coverage by say on Reddit. This helps the "National recognition" on the Tournaments section.

User:Kjhf/Sig 18:05, 27 October 2015 (UTC)