Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zelda Classic (2nd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:59, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Zelda Classic

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

Fails WP:GNG. Non-notable game, does not bring up any reliable sources in the custom Google search engine. Has been deleted several times before. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 08:43, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Nordic Dragon 08:45, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Nordic Dragon 08:45, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can see from the last AfD that significant searches were made to prove notability, I see there still isn't significant proof. Also of note, author's note on history "Created the page, because some hooligans deleted it due to it "not being notable enough". Is 10k user not "notable" enough for you? Jeez." Nordic Dragon 09:00, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per Nordic Dragon. —zziccardi (talk) 16:36, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: In case Soetermans's description was unclear, the article in question concerns software used for creating custom Zelda-like video games, not a game. —zziccardi (talk) 16:36, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying! soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 16:39, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a non-notable game dev software/editor failing WP:GNG with no reliable independent in-depth sources, such as WP:VG/RS. No meaningful hits in custom RS search. The sources in article are not reliable or in-depth. I don't see any significant coverage/changes since last AfD. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 13:14, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:31, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:31, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as searches found nothing better. SwisterTwister talk 07:08, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.