Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:S4 League
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the discussion was: delete and salt. Deryck C. 10:50, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
The article on this was deleted at two successive AfDs. The draft has been declined by 6 successive reviewers all within the last month. It's time to stop this. DGG ( talk ) 23:10, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- I disagree i have covered the notability policy and have given two reliable sources and even quoted a journalist critical opinion of it.If there is another reason as to be rejected/deleted id like to hear it.Simonmana (talk) 01:38, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete and SALT. I'd say the six rejections and two AFDs tell me you haven't covered the notability policies in any manner. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:25, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Rejection couldn't possibly give you the articles contents let alone if it met any notability policy which i have since i have two independent reliable sources of significant coverage and even a quote.Simonmana (talk) 10:41, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- And, what, everyone is wrong about this? Two AFDs and six more reviewers are all in support of deletion. In terms of sources, this is clearly a press release, this is a blurb with zero information, and [1] the review is I'm not certain a reliable source or a WP:BLOG. I don't need the explain the other two links. It's not a notable game. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 04:18, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- [2] this is not even on the games site its an article about the game in no way is it a press release this is about the psp unreleased version not about the pc game [3] this isnt a blog it doesnt have to meet the blogs standards if it is not one it is a news site covering news if you have doubts if the site is reliable im sure you can find out for your own decisionDaily News and Analysis.Simonmana (talk) 11:07, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- And, what, everyone is wrong about this? Two AFDs and six more reviewers are all in support of deletion. In terms of sources, this is clearly a press release, this is a blurb with zero information, and [1] the review is I'm not certain a reliable source or a WP:BLOG. I don't need the explain the other two links. It's not a notable game. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 04:18, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete, Redirect to Neowiz Games and Protect the redirect to prevent tendentious recreations. The decision was made at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/S4 League (2nd nomination), and the previous, that the topic is not notable. Redirect so that the next newcomer thinking to draft it again will be directed to the most relevant article. Even if consensus changes, spinouts emerge from the parent article, and are discussed at the parent article talk page. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:33, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- I was not informed about the second one as far as i remember a low blow in my book and about a different revision anyway.Simonmana (talk) 11:07, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.