Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sonic X-treme

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. WP:SNOW. –Juliancolton ^Talk · ^Review 18:35, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sonic X-treme

{{{talk}}} Untick (talk) 04:02, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is an article on an unfinished game program. It is based on pure speculation of what "might have been". The game will never be released. This article is unreferenced and relies entirely upon a single source, which is a fan-site interview with the producer of Sonic X-Treme before the plug was pulledlink. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, and unreferenced speculation about what “might have been” should not be the basis of an article. Untick (talk) 11:56, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MuZemike 04:12, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – I found a Joystiq article IGN article establishing a minimal amount of notability. Just because it was never released doesn't mean it's not notable. MuZemike 04:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Article seems perfectly ok to me. Staffwaterboy ^{Critique Me} ^Guestbook ^{Hate Comments} 06:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article could use some more inline citations using the notability sources MuZemike points out, but it seems notable. As mentioned in the article, this game was recently mentioned in a recent Nintendo Power with the editor commenting on a reader's comparison to Super Mario Galaxy. The mention may not be significant coverage in the magazine, but this recent reference should complement the others. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ost316 (talk • contribs) 15:33, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, the sources provided by MuZemike provide a reasonable indication of notability, especially the rather indepth IGN article. I imagine there will also be further coverage in contemporary print sources, as it slightly predates the popularisation of the Internet for this sort of stuff. That development section reads like it was brought from reasonable sources, the sources just haven't been cited. Some cleanup is required, but if cited well the article can stand on its own. If not, then it and available sources could be merged and covered as part of a larger series topic; that's an editorial matter though. Deletion isn't necessary on any front here, cancelled games aren't necessarily non-notable. -- Sabre (talk) 11:46, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Unfinished games in a notable game series are quite notable, and we have sources. Raymie Humbert (local radar | current conditions) 03:44, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A renegade, eh? What might have been is a different concept than what might be happening. It has reliable sources and various magazine mentions, I don't see why this would deleted. Elm-39 - T/C/N 17:39, 26 March 2009 (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.