Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tux, of Math Command: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 03:54, 27 January 2010

Tux, of Math Command

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

Non-notable game. The article's references have only passing mentions of the software being available somewhere, and/or are not reliable sources (school newsletters, etc.). Psychonaut (talk) 23:13, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep WP:RS does not seem to preclude the use of school newsletters as sources. Also the article is well written, though some things could be improved. Lastly, the use of free software in an educational setting strikes me as notable. RadManCF (talk) 23:21, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm pretty sure a school newsletter would count as one of the self-published sources that WP:RS says should be avoided. Besides which, I believe the newsletter in question merely mentions the software's availability at the school; this doesn't count as significant coverage. —Psychonaut (talk) 12:42, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. Nifboy (talk) 01:10, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete School newsletters in past RFD's have not been considered Reliable or Reputable sources. Now a local newspaper plus some TV coverage or some other newspaper/trade magazine coverage would qualify. Something from a school newsletter...WP:RS has this to say "For that reason 'self-published media'—whether books, 'newsletters', personal websites, open wikis, blogs, personal pages on social networking sites, Internet forum postings, or tweets—are largely not acceptable."? Salt the earth with this one, Admin. --Brian_{(view my history)}/^{(How am I doing?)} 03:50, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 **I'm pretty sure a school newsletter would count as one of the self-published sources that [[WP:RS]] says should be avoided.  Besides which, I believe the newsletter in question merely mentions the software's availability at the school; this doesn't count as significant coverage. —[[User:Psychonaut|Psychonaut]] ([[User talk:Psychonaut|talk]]) 12:42, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 *<small>'''Note''':  This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Deletion|list of video game related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Nifboy|Nifboy]] ([[User talk:Nifboy|talk]]) 01:10, 26 January 2010 (UTC)</small>
-'''Delete''' School newsletters in past RFD's have not been considered Reliable or Reputable sources.  Now a local newspaper plus some TV coverage or some other newspaper/trade magazine coverage would qualify. Something from a school newsletter? Salt the earth with this one, Admin. --[[User:Bschott|<font color="Purple">Brian</font>]]<sub>([[Special:Contributions/Bschott|<font color="Green">view my history</font>]])</sub>/<sup>([[User_talk:Bschott|<font color="orange">How am I doing?</font>]])</sup> 03:50, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
+'''Delete''' School newsletters in past RFD's have not been considered Reliable or Reputable sources.  Now a local newspaper plus some TV coverage or some other newspaper/trade magazine coverage would qualify. Something from a school newsletter...[[WP:RS]] has this to say "''For that reason ''''self-published media''''—whether books, ''''newsletters'''', personal websites, open wikis, blogs, personal pages on social networking sites, Internet forum postings, or tweets—are largely not acceptable.''"? Salt the earth with this one, Admin. --[[User:Bschott|<font color="Purple">Brian</font>]]<sub>([[Special:Contributions/Bschott|<font color="Green">view my history</font>]])</sub>/<sup>([[User_talk:Bschott|<font color="orange">How am I doing?</font>]])</sup> 03:50, 27 January 2010 (UTC)