Open Review

These notability guidelines what content, within a specific scope, we allow to be documented on the Wiki; and as such they need to be reviewed to ensure they represent the community's general opinion on what should and should not be documented. -RJ 20:58, 13 June 2012 (UTC)


Criteria for tournaments is yet to be determined. Please make your suggestions here. -RJ 20:58, 13 June 2012 (UTC)


Please discuss and suggest revisions to the Teams criteria here. -RJ 20:58, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I think the restrictions here are too serious. This would discount teams like Ice, PotM Bottom, and ROOT, for example. FIRE was big for a month or so before they became Complexity, but we wouldn't have been able to cover it. I think results are the biggest thing, whether we judge that by tournament success, stream views, or something else. Decency 05:26, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

The problem is - we document teams by their organizations, not the team itself; Such that when the organization has reached a certain notability criteria it's future pickups would also be inherently notable. Besides, all good teams would eventually be sponsored (FIRE got coL like a week after winning everything?), I don't see a problem with the use of organization to document teams in a professional way.
Note ROOT is sponsored by ROOT Gaming, the reason they aren't there is the lack of achievements. PotM Bottom and Ice never met the results requirement to begin with. Team Zenith, the most prominent example, has expressed that they will obtain a organization sponsorship by the end of The International. Redefining history 08:26, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
PotM Bottom has certainly met the results requirements now, winning the 2GD Arena and making the finals (maybe winning, no spoilers!) JD Masters X. We still can't include them, which I find extremely silly. Decency 19:11, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Considering the exemption made for Zenith, surely Potm Bottom's consistent form and numerous high quality victories, including the two toureys mentioned above and especially in the ProDota 2 League Season One should lead to their consideration for a similar exemption to be made? In addition to this, the roster has been as pretty stable for the last few months (especially compared to some of the more 'established' teams) with the only change being kizzle's replacement by TidesofTime. Would we have to wait for them to be invited to TI (which is what I assume secured Zenith their page) for them to garner their own page despite the fact they are arguably amongst the Top 10 non-Chinese Dota2 teams on the scene? Thanks TheKenwyne 19:38, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Considering that there have been a few notable exceptions since the last post, I think it's worth rekindling this discussion. Most obviously, No Tidehunter have been one of the most successful European teams and won Dreamhack Winter (!) but don't have a page. The GD B team are another strange exception that are arguably noteworthy, coming third in starladder season 3. I don't think it's worth maintaining the status quo because nth may announce their sponsor any day now (4 months and counting...) as we've not had a page on them for all that time and wouldn't allow for future, similar cases. I think we should change the notability requirements to include teams that either have sponsors, or teams that have placed highly in tournaments, though the exact requirements for tournament qualification are open for discussion. This would allow teams who haven't yet got a sponsor and other oddities, but allow for new sponsored teams (eg. QPAD Red Pandas) as well, who presumably have notable members. Notability for tournaments can be purely on prize pool to avoid a recursive problem arising. PickledJesus 19:05, 30 March 2013 (UTC)


Please discuss and suggest revisions to the Players criteria here. -RJ 20:58, 13 June 2012 (UTC)


Please discuss and suggest revisions to the Players criteria here. -RJ 20:58, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I like the proposed criterion. (That is: An official caster of a notable tournament.) --Kroocsiogsi 01:15, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Community websites

Criteria for community websites is yet to be determined. Please make your suggestions here. -RJ 20:58, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Threshold Alexa rank (i.e. top 200,000) with dedicated DotA/Dota 2 section? Officially affiliated with any notable (q.v.) team, tournament, or caster? --Kroocsiogsi 01:15, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Other comments

Any other comments relating to the notability guidelines are welcome in this section. -RJ 20:58, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

No idea on competitive stuff. Sorry. I endorse whatever redefhist says. --Kroocsiogsi 01:15, 23 June 2012 (UTC)