Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mind sport

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was

KEEP Jerzy(t) 05:00, 2005 Jan 20 (UTC)

Mind sport[edit]

I will switch my vote from ~~Del~~ to keep in the event of so far absent evidence of notable acceptance of this term. The only support put forward is

a 7-year-old org'n promoting the concept of the venerable practice of board games and pencil recreations as "sports", which is evidence less of acceptance than of some among us "mental athletes" being jealous of the public's attention to more visible forms of excellence; the split among the organizers and the allegations against 1/3 of those found worthy of mention suggest the likelihood of a state of disarray.
some vague "recognition" of FIDE by the IOC -- perhaps recognition that cooperation with FIDE might somehow be a way for IOC members to turn a few more corrupt bucks from their status, for all i know.

Further, the language i edited out, and the placement of Category:Mind sports in Category:Sports but not in Category:Games suggests this is an evangelistic project for a PoV.
--Jerzy (t) 22:42, 2005 Jan 14 (UTC)

Nominator Retracts Del vote, see below. --Jerzy (t) 20:15, 2005 Jan 17 (UTC)

Delete, not a widely used or even helpful category. Wyss 23:30, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Keep. Fascinating. The term appears to me quite widely enough used for an article; The fact that it's not universally recognised makes the article even more useful to those like me who'd never heard of the term. The motives of the contributors are not relevant so long as the material is encyclopedic. Andrewa 23:54, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- I intended to rebut the presumption that someone bothering to create an article is some evidence of notability. I happen to know of a crystal-clear precedent showing it can be relevant in that way: evidence of bad faith changed a 1D-2K-1Abst vote to a 3D-0K-1Abst-1Neutral one. (Not actually 3-1; the closer misconstrued a Neutral vote.) --Jerzy (t) 19:47, 2005 Jan 17 (UTC)
Keep dorky but has an acceptable level of notability. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 00:01, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)
Weak keep: really needs some citations, but I have heard the term before. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:16, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)

Is it possible you're thinking of mind games? Maybe not, but thought I'd ask to be sure. Wyss 06:34, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I'm sure, we used this term clear back circa 1970 when I was involved in high school math competitions. We even had team jackets and letter sweaters. How's that for dorky? -- Jmabel | Talk

Weak Keep, needs cleanup and expansion. Megan1967 01:44, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Delete as non-notable. Andrewa, just because it's interesting doesn't mean it's worthy of inclusion. The information might be better served if mentioned in the Mind Sports Organization article, as what they call mind sports. hfool/Roast me 03:31, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Keep as Dab (or at least as Redir). (I have retracted my vote, in nominating, for Del.) On reflection, and since i don't contest the org's article, and since the org's name is less memorable than this phrase that it promotes, i'd like to see this become a Dab between Mind Sports Organisation and Mental-skill game (which should include links, derived from this article's list, to categories of such games, including those not played by the org'n). Note this article's list can't be merged with the org's article without research to distinguish MSO games from other mental games. --Jerzy (t) 20:15, 2005 Jan 17 (UTC)

Final votes: Delete: 2 Keep: 5

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page. </div>