CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · History & Society

FunPlus Phoenix

Chinese esports organization

Layered newspapers, civic records and oral-history reels arranged as chronological evidence
History and societyInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionJun 19, 2026
Entity authoritySource title only
Source-derived summary

FunPlus Phoenix (FPX) is a Chinese professional esports organization owned by video game developer FunPlus. It has teams competing in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, Fortnite Battle Royale, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds, and Valorant. It was founded on 20 December 2017 following FunPlus' acquisition of a spot in the League of Legends Pro League (LPL), the top level of professional League of Legends in China. On 10 November 2019, FPX's League of Legends team won the 2019 League of Legends World Championship after sweeping G2 Esports in the grand finals.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “FunPlus Phoenix” is chinese esports organization. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through FunPlus, Phoenix and Chinese, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA useful synthesis for locating the documentary relationships between formal authority, participants and affected communities. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2017, 2019—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, FunPlus, Phoenix and Chinese is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “chinese esports organization” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

The record creator and administrative purpose are central evidence, because official documentation reflects both action and institutional priorities. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 19, 2026. The first chronological checks are 2017 and 2019.

Critical limits

Later summaries often reconcile disputed chronology or motive more neatly than the contemporary record permits. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.

Best used for
  • Event chronology
  • Institutional context
  • Locating named record creators
Verify next

Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “FunPlus Phoenix”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow FunPlus Phoenix primary sources, FunPlus Phoenix archive and FunPlus research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “FunPlus Phoenix”?
  2. Who created the surviving record, and for what administrative purpose?
  3. Which voices are present, absent or mediated by the institution?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “FunPlus Phoenix” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.