Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Killing Zone

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 Marasmusine (talk) 11:04, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Killing Zone[edit]

Non notable video game article that cites no sources or external links whatsoever. HJMitchell You rang? 18:32, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 16:46, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. While according to the game review sites its not a very good game, it has received reviews from IGN and allgame. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Salavat (talk • contribs) 17:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Salavat above. May not be a good game, but notable nonetheless. MuZemike 17:46, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. Even bad games get articles if there are reliable third party sources.Yob Mod 11:01, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. 86.5.58.234 (talk) 13:53, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep notable game. Most games published on consoles have reliable third-party sources on them, thus meeting WP:GNG. Randomran (talk) 19:00, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
KeepA bad article does not mean an non-notable one; an article without sources does not necessarily mean there are none - just that none have been added. Caissa's DeathAngel (talk) 20:04, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is no doubt the game does exist. The article is fine for a stub. Dream Focus 01:52, 7 May 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.