Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kaneva Game Platform

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. Cirt (talk) 20:08, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kaneva Game Platform[edit]

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

Article describes thing which no longer exists RawrMage (talk) 19:38, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral First of all, something no longer existing is not a rationale for deletion, or we'd be deleting historical figures and events left and right. That said, this article, Kaneva, and Virtual World of Kaneva look like clear candidates to be merged into one article. No opinion on whether Kaneva itself is notable or not, a glance around the Google News archive mostly brings up "Kaneva" as a last name and a smattering of blurbs about some guy who got arrested for luring kids in the game. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 20:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 15:31, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete – I found [1] but not much else. –MuZemike 05:18, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 01:57, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 00:24, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge or redirect to Kaneva per WP:PRODUCT. Marasmusine (talk) 10:20, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per significant coverage in [2] [3]. These articles are specifically about the game engine, not the game or the company. Pcap ping 08:42, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Pcap ping 08:42, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Marasmusine, the GameZone interview is hardly a neutral source and the the MMORPG.com source looks to be a user review type article (the writer is not listed on the site's staff, clicking on the contributor's name takes you to the social-network aspect of MMORPG.com). Even if that wasn't the case, we would need to establish MMORPG.com as more than a self-published source. I don't see individual notability here due to the lack of indepenent reliable sources. A search brings up nothing else to use for sourcing. Someoneanother 08:29, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Like I said in another MMORPG AfD, I'm not familiar with sites specializing in this genre. Thanks for pointing out that (some of?) the articles on mmorpg.com are user contributed. This article looked well written and not distinguishable to me from other game review site article like those on gamespot etc. Pcap ping 09:01, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - A lot of the user reviews on sites like these are surprisingly informative and polished, it's easily done. Someone another 16:41, 2 February 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.