Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Curvy Words
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 17:01, 13 May 2022 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
- 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. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 01:52, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Curvy Words[edit]
- Curvy Words (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No reliable sources given to support notability of this game; appears to be promotional. OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:49, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The Curvy Words puzzle is a rather "new" puzzle with an important twist to word searches. It has been used in thousands of classrooms. Since it is in wide use by teachers and students the name and description deserves worthiness to Wikipedia. This is not promotional except for the link to edHelper. That can be removed and I will edit to remove the link, but the type of puzzle is worthy of Wikipedia.[[User::Edhwiki]] — Edhwiki (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- Delete per nom Polargeo (talk) 18:06, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom, I can find no independent sources on this topic. - MrOllie (talk) 19:11, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Only source I can find is the aforementioned edhelper.com, which is neither independent nor non-promotional in nature. If this game achieves sufficient notability it should surely be included in Wikipedia, but until then this seems suspect. Ginsengbomb (talk) 19:59, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete since there is no evidence of notability. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:54, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: Fails WP:N. Joe Chill (talk) 22:55, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom and per WP:N fails WildHorsesPulled (talk) 23:25, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as NN. JBsupreme (talk) 19:03, 14 January 2010 (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.