User talk:Mdaha

Team articles
Hey Mdaha,

I recently put deletion tags on several team pages which you removed without responding to the tag itself. What is the reasoning behind creating 90~ articles which almost all but a handful have almost no information at all? Currently the information is "[TEAM NAME] is a team from [COUNTRY]" and usually also a rooster list. This country information is also listed at Competitive Teams and this page can be easily expended to include a table with the 5-man rooster. If this seems too bloat, then 5 new articles can be created as North American competitive teams, European competitive teams, etc. I fail to see how these teams require specific pages. --Celellach (talk) 15:29, 19 July 2015 (UTC)


 * While I agree that it is bloat, it's mostly because they are being half-assed at the moment. Basically I started this a couple months ago while also working on another wiki when my graphics card kinda died, so I got pretty far behind on this wiki. I plan on adding achievements to the teams that have won ESL and other tournaments. Right now I need to focus on Blizzcon and Road to Blizzcon though. Excuses aside, the reason that the pages exist is because my boss says there are to be no Red Links and that team pages help SEO. Teams in ESL are considered to hit notability guidelines at this time. Right now there is too much for me to focus on to get the Team Pages up to the level that I want, and I assume that you would want. --Mdaha (talk) 18:45, 19 July 2015 (UTC)


 * I think since the game is new that for the moment we can ignore notoriety guidelines. The pages might be sparse, but it lets us build up a framework as the game grows, rather than deciding at some arbitrary point later that the game is now big enough and then we'd have to move a bunch of data from the collective pages that you are suggesting Celellach to individual team pages and having to do a bunch of re-coding of templates and such. We can also get team news and roster changes as they happen instead of researching that stuff later. By starting out with this format early we can adjust our format and templates a bit at a time as we see how things work. Part of my thought is to not copy-paste code from Leaguepedia, which has messy and overly complicated templates in a lot of places. So, in way, think of the team pages as a sort of work-in-progress kind of things that will growing alongside the game. They might seem kind of empty, but we're starting out organized instead of organizing later. Then, once the game gets bigger, we can start worrying about notoriety guidelines. --Sigilbaram (talk) 20:09, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Ok, I see where you are coming from. I just hope you guys do eventually decide to delete the empty-page or only-rooster pages, as those (to me at least) make a wiki seem much more amateurish (and to me specific, a place I'd rather not waste my time in). On a related note, as you said, the game is new and we already have teams in the Category:Disbanded teams category. --Celellach (talk) 09:13, 22 July 2015 (UTC)