Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Euphoria (visual novel): Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 02:11, 16 April 2021

Euphoria (visual novel)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable video game failing WP:GNG with no reliable independent in-depth sources (WP:VRS), such as WP:VG/RS.

The only review is from Capsule Computers, which accepts volunteer writers and does not appear to be reliable (noticeboard mention). I am not sure about the content of The Anime Encyclopedia, but assuming significant coverage of the game (and not the anime), that would make 1 source. Every other source are product pages, directory entries or very brief listings -- nothing that would come close to significant coverage. The game has simply not received reviews from reliable outlets. Mainstream Western magazines of the time would not have covered an eroge game and I have no way to search adult-rated Japanese magazines on the off chance they have. Custom reliable source search does not return any usable results.

(Article moved to mainspace from declined draft, so taking to AfD since draftify no longer applies. I previously reviewed and declined the draft on the same notability grounds, although a couple new sources were added since.) — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 11:27, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 11:27, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:56, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

user:Hellknowz, this lacking of reviews is due to a irrelevant filter, that rejected the following list. I have asked for calling off the filter:

אילן שמעוני (talk) 13:13, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

These are not reliable sources (unless you can demonstrate author credentials, editorial practices or oversight, and history of credibility of the outlet, such as use by other reliable sources). — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 13:21, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why are the deemed unreliable? Each of them is a lengthy, in-depth review.

Forgot to mention, the following review is on its way to the references:

[[2]] אילן שמעוני (talk) 13:24, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What makes them reliable? Anyone can make a blog and start posting reviews. See WP:RS for what makes sources reliable and WP:VG/RS what in particular makes reliable video game sources. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 13:46, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, I see your point about blogs, I should check later weather these blogs have proven widespread influence. However, this review is from an established review site, that according to Alexa stands nicely in the front row of such sites. אילן שמעוני (talk) 22:17, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - All of the above reviews are from blogs, which are unreliable, since there is no editorial oversight. That's the issue with them. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:49, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. Jumpytoo Talk 17:08, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It's safe to say that major outlets wouldn't cover this due to its extreme subject matter. Whether you think that's a flaw of the notability system that something disgusting but with high production values could get ignored, the fact is that it would undoubtedly be considered non-notable and fails WP:GNG with the current sources provided._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 19:30, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If new sources are found and this survives deletion it should be moved to Euphoria (video game).--67.70.101.238 (talk) 20:35, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is a Visual Novel, not a game. The text-to-play ratio lies heavily for the text (and other means of VNs). Also, it's euphoria, not Euphoria. אילן שמעוני (talk) 22:35, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion came to the exact opposite conclusion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Archive_95#Visual_novel_as_a_genre and I haven’t seen anything newer to discount that.--67.70.101.238 (talk) 02:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ZXCVBNM, how does this review fails to fit in as a notable source? It is (among other things) an established review site, with a cadre of writers and more than adequate Alexa score to witness for its notability. אילן שמעוני (talk) 22:32, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Even established sites like that may not count as WP:RS, and Alexa scores do not count in determining reliability. For Wikipedia's standards, which are very stringent, Lewdgamer would be a WP:SELFPUBLISHed source. Often, if something is not from an established and widely-recognized news organization, websites are vetted by experienced Wikipedia editors to determine if something can be counted as a reliable source or not. For anime/manga-related topics, for example, you can find a list of reliable sources here: WP:A&M/RS. Sandtalon (talk) 01:35, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some private view, not affecting this discussion: I have heard about euphoria years before I actually read it, and from many sources (none of which is acceptable as source. I talk about discussions in forums, reddit etc.). So for myself, I am sure of its notability. Of cource, the fact I know this is irrelavent. But I will say - euphoria stands out high in the genre for its depth as well its high-quality delivery of a very shocking story. Both its fame and notoriety preceded it - years before it was translated to English. אילן שמעוני (talk) 22:32, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I was able to find two sources from the Japanese language wiki article. https://www.menscyzo.com/2021/04/post_189102.html this one is run by Cyzo [ja] and is an adult-oriented news site. Not entirely sure of how credible this one is https://otapol.com/2017/08/post-83121.html. curious if other people think just the first one would satisfy WP:GNG. Daiichi1 (talk) 22:39, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- I believe OTAPOL is published by Cyzo as well. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 22:46, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Here's two reliable sources for the article: https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2014-08-09/mangagamer-adds-euphoria-the-house-in-fata-morgana-eden-visual-novels/.77467 and https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/press-release/2016-05-21/mangagamer-announces-new-titles-hardcopies-and-anime-expo-guests-at-acen/.102369 I may add them shortly, or someone else may. (In addition, and I know this isn't in the GNG or anything, but I would be in favor of inclusion because it has an anime adaptation, which to me, indicates at least some amount of notability.) Sandtalon (talk) 01:47, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 ::If new sources are found and this survives deletion it should be moved to [[Euphoria (video game)]].--[[Special:Contributions/67.70.101.238|67.70.101.238]] ([[User talk:67.70.101.238|talk]]) 20:35, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 :::It is a [[Visual Novel]], not a game. The text-to-play ratio lies heavily for the text (and other means of VNs). Also, it's euphoria, not Euphoria. [[User:אילן שמעוני|אילן שמעוני]] ([[User talk:אילן שמעוני|talk]]) 22:35, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
+::::This discussion came to the exact opposite conclusion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Archive_95#Visual_novel_as_a_genre and I haven’t seen anything newer to discount that.--[[Special:Contributions/67.70.101.238|67.70.101.238]] ([[User talk:67.70.101.238|talk]]) 02:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 ::[[User:Zxcvbnm|ZXCVBNM]], how does [https://www.lewdgamer.com/2016/02/22/review-euphoria this review] fails to fit in as a notable source? It is (among other things) an established review site, with a cadre of writers and more than adequate Alexa score to witness for its notability. [[User:אילן שמעוני|אילן שמעוני]] ([[User talk:אילן שמעוני|talk]]) 22:32, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 ::: Even established sites like that may not count as [[WP:RS]], and Alexa scores do not count in determining reliability. For Wikipedia's standards, which are very stringent, Lewdgamer would be a [[WP:SELFPUBLISH]]ed source. Often, if something is not from an established and widely-recognized news organization, websites are vetted by experienced Wikipedia editors to determine if something can be counted as a reliable source or not. For anime/manga-related topics, for example, you can find a list of reliable sources here: [[WP:A&M/RS]]. [[User:Sandtalon|Sandtalon]] ([[User talk:Sandtalon|talk]]) 01:35, 16 April 2021 (UTC)