Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Video games

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Video games. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Video games|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Video games. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Archived discussions (starting from August 2015) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch

See also Games-related deletions.

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Editors can create a redirect if they so choose. Liz Read! Talk! 00:31, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matt Firor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Insufficiently sourced and doesn't appear notable, redirect to ZeniMax Online Studios? IgelRM (talk) 21:31, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:42, 1 August 2024 (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.
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 keep‎. I see a consensus to Keep this article and there have been no response to my relisting comment. Liz Read! Talk! 23:44, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Portugal 1111: A Conquista de Soure (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG, with few reviews or significant coverage in reliable sources. This is one of the only reviews I could find, and it's in a publication of uncertain reliability. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 17:39, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Lists PTGamers.com and Gamerstek.com under external links. Primary source [1] IgelRM (talk) 12:29, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Both sites are now dead, which doesn't speak towards their reliability. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 13:58, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
DeleteKeep - Gamerstek review is archived here: [2]. According to their about page, they had a video game section in Destak newspaper, which indicates some sort of reliability. However, it's a moot point if there are no other potential reliable sources since 1 review is not enough. PTGamers.com review ref seems completely dead, but looking at their archived main site ([3]) there doesn't seem to be an about page or similar, I can't find anything to indicate any reliability. --Mika1h (talk) 18:36, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot to mention that Push Start ref, which is an independently published digital magazine, seems unreliable to me looking at the editorial page: [4]. --Mika1h (talk) 18:46, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Gamerstek and Mega Score reviews are enough for GNG. --Mika1h (talk) 08:58, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The game got in-depth coverage in a June 2004 issue of Mega Score, including an interview (p.30, 31), and a review (p.70, 71). The only other coverage I was able to find is a brief mention of the game in a 2021 article from the newspaper Observador about video games about Portugal. It's possible that the game got coverage in Portuguese newspapers at the time of release (Newspapers.com has no Portuguese newspapers unfortunately and I wouldn't know where else to look), as the Observator article and the interview in Mega Score indicate that the game was partially funded by Soure city hall. Waxworker (talk) 19:05, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I found a dead link from TSF (radio station). It might be useful to mention the game on the Visão article. IgelRM (talk) 13:49, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 21:21, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the reviews presented above. Two reliable reviews, good enough for me. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:05, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting because although there is a consensus to Keep there is a challenge on whether sources are of a sufficient quality to establish notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:27, 7 August 2024 (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.
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. Liz Read! Talk! 05:28, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ciberbit (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Written like an advertisement and fails WP:NCORP with a lack of any significant coverage in reliable sources. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 17:30, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:27, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Literally no coverage other than their website found. Working with Microsoft in this case means publishing games on their platform, which isn't notable. They make software, but don't describe what it is or why it's notable, further hindering our efforts to prove notability. I can't find anything about this commercial enterprise. Oaktree b (talk) 23:02, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: No sign of notability anywhere. I'm not even sure if it still exists. Looks like a relic from the past when notability standards were much less strict. C F A 💬 01:56, 1 August 2024 (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.
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 redirect‎ to Jon Radoff. Liz Read! Talk! 05:16, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Beamable (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Most if not all articles about Disruptor Beam and Beamable are simple announcements that fail WP:CORPDEPTH criteria. The article itself appears to fail WP:NCORP without significant coverage. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 14:06, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 18:59, 30 July 2024 (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.
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 redirect‎ to Digital Eel. If you disagree with the Redirect target, you can discuss it on the talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 22:46, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Iikka Keränen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't appear notable, redirect to Digital Eel? IgelRM (talk) 19:08, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Two different Redirect target articles suggested.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:23, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Digital Eel. Both are good redirect targets but I prefer this one. --Mika1h (talk) 15:22, 30 July 2024 (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.
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 redirect‎ to Pelaaja. Liz Read! Talk! 22:44, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miika Huttunen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't appear notable, redirect to Pelaaja? IgelRM (talk) 19:01, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:23, 28 July 2024 (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.
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 no consensus‎. The initial mistake combined with divided opinions among the other participants unsurprisingly produced no consensus after multiple relists. RL0919 (talk) 20:59, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Harry M. Rubin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Upon review of article and its sources, the person in question does not meet the notability guidelines in question: the person is not (1) cited by 3rd party sources other than websites that repeat his bio as an official founder of Samuel Adams beer (2) known for originating a new concept [see point #1] (3) become a significant monument, etc. (4) He is not cited as by peers and 3rd party sources for the work that is well-known or significant. The article was written by a blocked user and could primarily serve the purpose of self promotion as defined in WP:NOTADVERT. P3D7AQ09M6 (talk)

If deleted Harry Rubin (virologist) should be moved to the base name since Harry Rubin redirects here.--67.70.101.117 (talk) 23:48, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Folks, My apologies, I actually meant to nominate Harry Rubin (virologist) Late night editing got the best of me. Upon a 2nd look at this article in particular, I found new reputable secondary sources to that show indeed this Harry Rubin was indeed a Samuel Adams co-founder. I'm closing going to close this deletion nomination in favor of doing some work to improve the article itself. P3D7AQ09M6 (talk) 04:28, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe delete both of them.
Being a minor, behind-the-scenes partner of a business does not make someone notable.
ApLundell (talk) 05:57, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the spirit of WP:GD I'm going to suggest that we pursue a constructive alternative such as improving or cleaning up the article. Two main reasons (1) Being one of the Samuel Adams founders both within the beverage field and just generally is definitely a major contribution. It looks he was not the frontman, but, indeed, he's been recognized by multiple secondary sources as being a founder and his involvement in various beverage investments is notable enough to be topic of headlines. As you probably know, media outlets have full control over headlines, which means that these media outlets viewed his involvement as "the story". On a more basic level, Samuel Adams is also billion dollar major conglomerate, it's widely recognized, and is part of the American social milieu (2) I digged into other secondary sources and there's quite a few other significant achievements such as being one of the people who started GT Interactive, which launched DOOM (a major video game) (3) This nomination was a careless mistake on my part so it's kind of a fluke nomination. My apologies again to all for that bonehead error and for wasting folks time reviewing this!
re: Harry Rubin (virologist) Even though I intended to nominate it, I also now lean towards keeping it. Mostly because his achievements within his specific domain are quite significant.
If we deny this deletion nomination, I can take an action item to improve both pages.P3D7AQ09M6 (talk) 22:18, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: See also AFD'ed C. M. Rubin, his partner. IgelRM (talk) 08:36, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. We need to hear from more editors as the nominator states they didn't mean to nominate this article (so a withdrawal of sorts) but an editor is arguing for deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:05, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:44, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As an investor in the IPO of Boston Beer Company in December of 1995, I recall that in the final offering prospectus filed with the SEC, Harry M. Rubin was listed as one of the largest owners of the company. Hence, he had to be one of the significant original partners and not a minor behind-the-scenes partner as queried in the 21 July comment above. I did not retain the SEC offering prospectus, but it can be requested from the SEC from their archives. Pete S Williams (talk) 05:55, 10 August 2024 (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.

Proposed deletions

Redirects

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 15#Nuzlocke