Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Video games

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Shortcuts:
Gamepad.svg WikiProject
Video games
Main page talk
Manual of style
Article guidelines talk
Templates talk
Sources talk
Departments
Assessment talk
Reference library talk
  Print archive talk
Newsletter talk
  Current issue Draft
Articles
Article alerts talk
Pages for deletion talk
New pages talk
Article requests talk
Essential articles talk
Most popular articles talk
Featured content talk
Good content talk
Recognized content talk

viewtalkeditchanges

The Deletion page contains video game articles and related miscellany currently listed for deletion. Articles for deletion can be found at Today's Deletion Log. This page only transcludes discussions; to nominate a new article for deletion please see the articles for deletion page.

To list deletion debates on this page, transclude the discussion here by inserting {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ARTICLE NAME}} under the appropriate day. Add {{subst:VG deletion}} to the debate when listing it here. New entries should be placed at the top of the list, and are sorted by day.

For closed debates, please use {{afdl|article||open date YYYY-MM-DD|close date YYYY-MM-DD|result}} to list debates on this page. If the article has been nominated for deletion before, please use {{afdl|article|article's AfD page|open date (YYYY-MM-DD)|close date (YYYY-MM-DD)|result}} instead. Miscellany nominated for deletion follow the same pattern, but with mfdl instead of afdl.

Contents

July 24 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

Xbox One system software et al[edit]

Xbox One system software (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Xbox One system software" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)
Xbox 360 system software (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
PlayStation 3 system software (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
PlayStation 4 system software (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Wii system software (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Wii U system software (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Nintendo 3DS system software (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Czar (talk · contribs) asserts per Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Archive_99#Category:Game_console_operating_systems that articles describing video game console operating systems must be removed as a violation of WP:NOTCHANGELOG, WP:GAMECRUFT, and unnecessary duplication of content already contained in parent articles.

However, I assert that this requires additional discussion as it is a significant change that was backed by a single editor in a two-year-old discussion. ViperSnake151  Talk  15:49, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Redirect all to their respective console's sections on software (which is to say restore the redirect). Both What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTCHANGELOG#4, policy) and the WPVG guidelines (WP:VGSCOPE#9, guideline) both say explicitly that we do not host changelogs as an encyclopedia. If the respective console articles began to bulge in their software sections and saw a need to spill out summary style into their own articles, then no problem, but that's not what's happening here. These are just really big tables of every single, minute change to software, which meets the policy and guidelines of what we do not host to the letter. Anything that needs to be said about the system software can be said in the parent articles unless reliable sources show that the software has something significant that makes it more than just a part of the product. – czar 17:53, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
    • Comment: So why are we allowed to have Android version history and iOS version history? VGSCOPE does not say game hardware, it says the version history of a game (although I just amended that guideline right now, because the whole passage applies to game and game-related topics). But that seems to be in the spirit of WP:NOTCHANGELOG. However, the WP:NOTCHANGELOG really says "Use reliable third-party (not self-published or official) sources in articles dealing with software updates to describe the versions listed or discussed in the article. Common sense must be applied with regard to the level of detail to be included." So it's not a full-on ban on changelogs. ViperSnake151  Talk  18:15, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Other stuff exists. The spirit of NOTCHANGELOG is that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. There is a difference between a change log (0.01 version update minutiae) and a synthetic history of version changes based in secondary sources. Android/iOS is famous as software while Xbox's software is secondary. There is more merit (and reliable sources!) about the differences between Firefox 3 and 4 than the differences between Xbox OS X and Y. That's fine. But this is not a discussion about Software version history but about specific articles—I see no case in which it is worth retaining the primary source version histories of these articles nominated, and once those are removed, there's nothing left to keep, so we're left to merge. The articles on the history of iOS/Android/individual web browsers are a different animal, an animal that still should have its primary source change logs gutted but at least has the potential of being rewritten as a synthetic history between major features and versions. The video game console software doesn't need a separate article for that and can be written summary style. I'll add that my suspicion is that these lists are the equivalent of WP:Dateline—it's easier to maintain an article where you just dump version history than it is to write the useful, synthetic history that should be in its place. – czar 18:40, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Redirect all of them - per WP:NOT. It's not encyclopedic to list every system update that occurs, and the operating system info is better shown as a (shorter) section in its respective parent article. (I would have challenged these articles sooner, but the pure volume of these sorts of articles made me think they were acceptable. If you actually look into policy though, it is not.) Sergecross73 msg me 02:25, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Hold on; shouldn't each of these be discussed separately? Wii system software is more than just a changelog; it also has a good bit of material about the nature of the software that is not found in the parent articles. —SamB (talk) 19:26, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't think so. It's all unsourced and there's nothing to merge. If you want to merge other parts, go ahead. – czar 19:30, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Yes, well, being unsourced now is not listed as a WP:DEL-REASON; there'd have to be a thorough attempt to find reliable sources first. —SamB (talk) 19:37, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Chicken and egg. If the article topic had enough sources, it would split out summary style from its parent article. If someone wants to find or debate sources and build it out, it can be done from the Wii article's section on software. – czar 19:46, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict) The policy is NOT to cut off limbs and see if they grow back. Also, what section on software? And, has something significant changed since Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wii System Software? —SamB (talk) 20:00, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Yes, WP's notability standards have changed significantly in the last eight years. – czar 22:37, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

For now I am going to change related articles to Afd and remove all changelog part to see how they will fit. --Cartakes (talk) 19:57, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

So I have removed the changelog part in articles such as Nintendo 3DS system software, Wii U system software and Wii system software. I do think they perfectly fit in Wikipedia even without the changelog part. WP:NOTCHANGELOG is now invalid for these articles. --Cartakes (talk) 20:07, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. —SamB (talk) 20:10, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

But surely the changelog is notable enough to be in the page? I really found it helpful for many years. Can you elaborate upon your point? Does the changelog detract from the rest of the page? Never mind. I just re-read the "no changelog" guideline. Sorry - my mistake. --BenM64 (talk)

Keep after deleting the changelog: Obviously, the nominator's argument for the deletion of these article is WP:NOTCHANGELOG and WP:GAMECRUFT. It is better to remove the changelog part than simply deleting all these articles. Both of these reasons are now invalid for these articles since changelog no longer exists. --Cartakes (talk) 20:22, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
I understand now. I suppose the changelog took up more of the page than the main summary, WP:NOTCHANGELOG or not. --BenM64 (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
What's left after removing the changelog info though? And is that info covered by 3rd party sources? And if there's anything left, would it be better as a section in the parent subjects article? Sergecross73 msg me 22:00, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Take a look at Wii U system software for example. There are A LOT of contents and 3rd party sources provided. And obviously it does not fit in a section in the parent subjects article as well. --Cartakes (talk) 22:09, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Almost all of the content (Miiverse, Wii Mode,etc) is, and/or should be, covered at the main Wii U article or their own articles... Sergecross73 msg me 22:16, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Almost all of these contents in fact don't have their own articles (remember? the nominator was even trying to delete articles such as LiveArea). The Wii U article only has some very brief mentioning of features such as Wii mode for example, compared with the article Wii U system software, which contains much more detailed information regarding these features, which don't really fit in Wii U article either. The parent articles are not supposed to be detailed collections of every information about them.--Cartakes (talk) 22:24, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Which makes the "system software" page a coatrack for non-notable software features and change logs. Serge has it exactly right—there's nothing left to substantiate a fork for "system software" after removing the change logs. – czar 22:37, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
May I see the "system software" page as a "Main article" for the software features etc of the parent articles? These information are too detailed to be fit in the parent articles. Compared with for example Konqueror vs KHTML, the latter containing more technical info regarding Konqueror. --Cartakes (talk) 22:45, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Just about all of these are discussed somewhere else though. Miiverse, Nintendo eShop, Nintendo TVii etc. The article is unnecessary and redundant. Sergecross73 msg me 22:31, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Just want to mention that the "system software" page is for discussing the software features etc of the parent articles themselves, not an article about individual features. You may in fact consider the "system software" page as a "Main article" for the software features etc of the parent articles, which are too detailed to be fit in the parent articles. --Cartakes (talk) 23:00, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
"Main articles" (usually called "parent/child articles", and usually based on summary style) require proof of significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources. (?) A list of vetted video game sources is available here. From a cursory search, no one is discussing "Wii system software" as independent from the Wii itself. – czar 23:05, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Have you looked at Wii U system software yet? It contains lots of independent sources already. For demonstration purpose you can see what I mean as a "Main article" here. No, it is not mean to be independent from the Wii U itself, but as a child article for the Wii U#Software section. The Wii U#Software section contains summary style info, while the child article contains more detailed info. --Cartakes (talk) 23:13, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm just saying, the articles were deleted, nothing of encyclopedic value would be lost; the "changelog stuff" doesn't belong, and the rest of it is covered at other articles. (The parent article, the spinoff articles for their online services, etc) Sergecross73 msg me 19:14, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
I already removed all the "changelog stuff" in all these articles yesterday, so the "changelog" issue basically no longer exists. As for the rest, a question for you: should the article Features new to Windows 8 be deleted too when the section Windows 8#New and changed features already exists? Obviously the article Features new to Windows 8 covers more detailed info than the section Windows 8#New and changed features, similar to the fact that the article Wii U system software covers more detailed info than the section Wii U#Software. --Cartakes (talk) 19:33, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Honestly, I think your example is also excessive and should just have the main points in the parent article. There's too much excessive detail - if you want that much detail, you may as well go read the software manual. Sergecross73 msg me 21:50, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Simon Strange[edit]

Simon Strange (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Simon Strange" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Long standing BLP page that has never seen a ref improve. From my cursory search, I don't see any substantial coverage. One interview but that'd basically be primary. The rest is user created sites. Sulfurboy (talk) 03:23, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. AdrianGamer (talk) 15:24, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. AdrianGamer (talk) 15:25, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:01, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:01, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

3SwitcheD[edit]

3SwitcheD (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "3SwitcheD" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Discussed notability at Talk:3SwitcheD but don't feel it is resolved. The Gamercast article is something towards notability, as it is a review; the other two references don't seem to be reliable reviews. It is unclear that this is more than a run-of-the-mill computer game.Sending WP:APPNOTE to X201. Boleyn (talk) 12:53, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) X201 (talk) 14:01, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

@Boleyn: I tagged it because of the state it was in - it hasn't improved much since. Sources may come to light during this discussion, but at the moment my opinion, in order of preference, is Move to Draft followed by Delete - X201 (talk) 14:06, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89(T·E·C) 19:15, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

July 23 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

Monster Girl Quest[edit]

Monster Girl Quest (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Monster Girl Quest" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

non notable game Gaijin42 (talk) 14:50, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89(T·E·C) 01:35, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89(T·E·C) 01:35, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 02:07, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:07, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Wikia is licensed under cc-by-sa so it's an attribution issue, not a copyvio (unless it's coming from somewhere other than Wikia) – czar 04:18, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Oops. Sorry about that. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:34, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Gambitious[edit]

Gambitious (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Gambitious" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

no notability. None of the sources are sufficiently reliable. DGG ( talk ) 13:50, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89(T·E·C) 01:36, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89(T·E·C) 01:37, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 02:03, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Not an abundant offering, and not much coverage after 2012, but enough significant coverage for a small article based on reliable reporting. There are also more duplicate refs available, but I felt that this covered it. – czar 04:28, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Maybe draft/userfy instead as I considered the sources found and the ones I found including here and here but, as it seems there hasn't been much recent activity, I'm not sure what the future plans are. SwisterTwister talk 05:24, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Merge to Symbid‎. Notable at it's launch, but now Gambitious is a subsidiary of Symbid and not all that notable by itself.--Nowa (talk) 13:44, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

July 22 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

Gift (video game)[edit]

Gift (video game) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Gift (video game)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Can't find any sources on this article to warrant its notability. The only thing that would count was a PC Zone review mentioned on GameRankings. But I can't even find the review due to not owning a copy. But even that might not help. GamerPro64 04:40, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89(T·E·C) 23:14, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 22:59, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:59, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

July 20 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

MPCon[edit]

MPCon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "MPCon" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Non notable org, no citations of significant coverage in independent, sources. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:29, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 16:54, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:54, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:54, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:54, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep. Cited sources include the Detroit Free Press and Detroit Fox 2 News. Yes they're local news sources but major new sources and reputable. Dismiss them as local and you'll have to include the Chicago Tribune, New York Times, Washington Post with that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.97.75.145 (talk) 22:32, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
That doesn't make much sense. Local papers covering local things versus national papers covering national things: very different. It's telling of this event's larger import when mainstream source don't report on it. In this case, the audience is local. – czar 23:26, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95 Talk 17:45, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

July 19 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. - Penwhale | dance in the air and follow his steps 01:29, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

The Mighty Jingles[edit]

The Mighty Jingles (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "The Mighty Jingles" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Article Subject is non-notable. Article cites only two sources, which are one-off interviews. Majority of article is uncited, and contains original research. Cbrittain10 (talk|contribs) 17:50, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

WP: Notability Review

I have been asked to provide additional explanation per WP:Notability. I shall do so: Basic Criteria

"People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject."

I see two sources, which are insignificant interviews.

Alright, let's look at additional applicable criteria.

Wikiproject Military History Notability Guide: People

"In particular, individuals will almost always have sufficient coverage to qualify if they:

Were awarded their nation's highest award for valour; or Were awarded their nation's second-highest award for valour (such as the Navy Cross) multiple times; or Held a rank considered to be a flag, general or air officer, or their historical equivalents; or Held the top-level military command position of their nation's armed forces (such as Chief of the General Staff), or of a department thereof (such as Chief of Army Staff); or Played an important role in a significant military event; or Commanded a substantial body of troops in combat; or Made a material contribution to military science that is indisputably attributed to them; or Were the undisputed inventor of a form of military technology which significantly changed the nature of or conduct of war; or Were recognized by their peers as an authoritative source on military matters/writing."

Sure, maybe in World of Tanks, but that isn't what I call a war...

Any Biography

1. The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for one several times. 2. The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field.

None of the above apply.

Entertainers

1. Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. 2. Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following. 3. Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.

2. MAY apply if 400k subscribers count, but I don't consider the Youtube subscriber count to be entirely reliable.

Cbrittain10 (talk|contribs) 21:28, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 01:45, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:46, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:46, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:46, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
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.

July 17 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. Michig (talk) 08:03, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Native 1080p or 60fps Xbox One Games[edit]

Native 1080p or 60fps Xbox One Games (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Native 1080p or 60fps Xbox One Games" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

I fail to see how this list is important or necessary here, with the unnecessary emphasis on 1080p and 60fps. We have a more comprehensive and complete list like List of Xbox One games, and this is very redundant. AdrianGamer (talk) 06:37, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:47, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:47, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
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.

July 16 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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 merge to List of Mega Man characters. Black Kite (talk) 13:05, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

List of Mega Man Battle Network characters[edit]

List of Mega Man Battle Network characters (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "List of Mega Man Battle Network characters" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

I couldn't verify that this meets WP:NOTABILITY. This has been tagged for notability for over 7 years, and there was no consensus at AfD last year; it didn't attract many comments. Hopefully, we can finally resolve this. Boleyn (talk) 17:51, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89(T·E·C) 03:03, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89(T·E·C) 03:04, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89(T·E·C) 03:05, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89(T·E·C) 03:05, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Would this make more sense to be discussed as a merge discussion on the series talk page. While mirages can be brought up in an AFD they are suppose to be used only for pages that the nominwtor wanted deleted, a the only way I could see this being s valid AFD would be if you were also planning to dlelete the serie page meaning that there would be nowhere to merge this too.--67.68.29.1 (talk) 02:23, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Response I brought this here because I want this deleted. Where are you suggesting it be merged to? Boleyn (talk) 06:41, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
The series page would be the logical choice. A merge does not need to include everything thought and I think the characteds should be mentioned somewhere.--67.68.29.1 (talk) 16:10, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Merge and trim to List of Mega Man characters. Add a section called "Battle Network characters" and list the starring characters that are new to the franchise. The regular characters can have additional descriptions on their roles in the Battle Network series. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 23:12, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment from nominator AngusWOOF's suggestion seems preferable to deletion - my mind's been changed. Boleyn (talk) 06:29, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
I'd also add that the sections marked Other recurring, non-recurring and anime-exclusive are full of mostly minor characters and should not be merged. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 06:36, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
@Boleyn, are you withdrawing the nom? – czar 17:21, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment' no czar, I'm suggesting it may be a good idea to close as merge. No point re-starting a merge proposal - might as well get it resolved here. Boleyn (talk) 18:47, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
@Boleyn, right, or we could close the AfD, boldly merge, and have it resolved that way. Otherwise it just waits until the seven-day close tomorrow. – czar 18:51, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment czar, if you're prepared to merge them, then I'm happy for discussion to be closed. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 20:22, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
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.

July 15 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

Aurion Legacy of Kori-Odan[edit]

Aurion Legacy of Kori-Odan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Aurion Legacy of Kori-Odan" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Video game. No attempt to provide evidence of notability. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:54, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89(T·E·C) 00:08, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:34, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep per Czar's sources. Redirect to Kiro'o Games, the developer. Software article of unclear notability, but the dev. has somewhat better sourcing; being one of only a handful of Africa-based game development companies is a point in favor of notability, and redirects from titles to developers a common solution in this case.Dialectric (talk) 18:37, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 09:13, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
I usually recommend searching the vetted video game reliable sources custom Google search before going to AfD. Also, since there are pages for this game's dev, it might have been a good idea to try even redirection as a minimum before bringing the topic to AfD. Anyway, given the above sources, I recommend withdrawing the nom. @RHaworth and Dialectric – czar 17:07, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

July 13 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. (non-admin closure) Kraxler (talk) 16:48, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

NotGTAV[edit]

NotGTAV (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "NotGTAV" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Non-notable video game fails WP:GNG, almost all the references are just places where you can purchase the game, the developers website, or minor reviews some of which are from questionable sources. -War wizard90 (talk) 22:58, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. -War wizard90 (talk) 22:58, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -War wizard90 (talk) 22:58, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. -War wizard90 (talk) 22:58, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. -War wizard90 (talk) 22:58, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
The problem is that WP:GNG explicitly states that minor coverage is not sufficient. It needs to be "significant" coverage, not "minor" or trivial coverage. This article does not inherit notability from the Grand Theft Auto IV game it is spoofing. The only reason it's received any coverage is because the gameplay is so poor and proceeds are going to a charitable cause. All of that is fine and dandy, but this doesn't have the coverage to pass WP:GNG, at the very least it's a case of WP:TOOSOON. -War wizard90 (talk) 23:21, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
Regardless of its quality or reasons its getting coverage, it is getting coverage, and that's what matters - the reasons why do not. Sergecross73 msg me 14:53, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep - per Sam Walton's sources. They are sources that are not trivial, passing mentions, but rather, articles focused entirely on the subject. Each article is a few paragraphs long as well. To me, that satisfies significant coverage. Its not a home run, sure, but it limps by the standard. Sergecross73 msg me 14:57, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep - spoof of a game but still a game. no reason for it to be deleted.[1]Thursby16 (talk) 21:41, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
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. postdlf (talk) 17:13, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

List of James Bond firearms[edit]

List of James Bond firearms (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "List of James Bond firearms" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

The list contains trivial information about which firearms appear in James Bond films and games. Moreover, it is unsourced original research. It will not be possible to source this information until the director of a James Bond film does an interview about guns which is unlikely. I mentioned the possibility of deletion on the talk page 1.5 years ago and the only response I received (from User:AadaamS) was one of support. Connor Behan (talk) 04:50, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Delete because it's not a suitable topic for a list article as per WP:SAL. I fail to see how a list of props in James Bond films is worthy of a standalone article and how it isn't film trivia. AadaamS (talk) 06:07, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Dispatch with extreme prejudice. This belongs in the Internet Movie Firearms Database, not here. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:43, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:SAL. While there will be some readers who are interested in this they have the IMFB mentioned by Clarityfiend as well as the James Bond wikia which has almost exactly the same article here. I can't tell which came first as I couldn't find a history tab at their site. MarnetteD|Talk 13:38, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete- the nominator is 100% correct. This is unsourced fancruft. Reyk YO! 07:44, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. North America1000 11:42, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. North America1000 11:42, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. North America1000 11:43, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Firearms-related deletion discussions. North America1000 11:43, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 16:22, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:22, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
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.

July 12 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. Consensus is that the notability guidelines are now met with the coverage found during this discussion. Davewild (talk) 06:42, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Online Abuse Prevention Initiative[edit]

Online Abuse Prevention Initiative (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Online Abuse Prevention Initiative" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Doesn't seem to meet notability guidelines. The source used only mentions the initiative's existence in passing. Only other coverage I've found is gamepolitics which mentions the initiative in passing in relation to other issues,[12] and The Open Source which I'm not sure is an RS. [13] Bosstopher (talk) 17:42, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89(T·E·C) 18:02, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89(T·E·C) 18:03, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. North America1000 12:05, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete but draft/userfy if wished I suppose, as my searches here and here easily found nothing good. SwisterTwister talk 06:17, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete Per nom and Swister. CorporateM (Talk) 07:06, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep. The organization and its activities have attracted significant coverage in multiple, independent reliable sources—specifically, the group and its campaign against ICANN's proposal to de-anonymize domain name WHOIS records are the subject of full-length articles in The Guardian [14] and Clubic [15]. There also appears to be some brief and indirect criticism of the group in other sources such as Breitbart [16]—I'm not sure whether this is admissible (even under WP:BIASED) as it's more about the group's founder personally than the organization itself. I have just expanded the article on the basis of the Guardian and Clubic coverage; if anyone wants to make a case for including anything from Breitbart I suggest that this could be discussed on the talk page. —Psychonaut (talk) 19:43, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
    @CorporateM and Philg88: Pinging previous !voters in response to major changes to the article. Personally at this point I'm undecided on whether or not this counts as enough coverage. However, if it does get deleted its probably worth userfying in case further coverage ensues. Thanks for improving the article Psychonaut. Bosstopher (talk) 20:12, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
    There's also an article in USA Today which has four paragraphs about OAPI and its ICANN campaign [17]. —Psychonaut (talk) 21:25, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
I agree with Bosstopher but if I had to choose, I'd go with weak keep to almost keep simply because of the added sources. SwisterTwister talk 21:51, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
Still delete for me. The sources provided are strong RS', but they only feature a sentence or paragraph related to this organization, and mostly not even about it directly, so much as about its commentary on a subject. Not enough for CORPDEPTH. My delete vote is hopeless, now that relevance has been established with a subject most Wikipedians have a special interest in, so I understand that consensus will go the other way. CorporateM (Talk) 06:43, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep One of the few notable organizations to arise out of the Gamergate controversy. Ideally, I'd say merge this to a Randi Harper article but that article doesn't exist. Additional sources helped move this from a weak keep to keep. Liz Read! Talk! 22:12, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Switching to Keep I'll withdraw the AfD if @CorporateM: has no objections to me doing so. (hopefully the ping should work this time) Brustopher (talk) 23:40, 18 July 2015 (UTC) Just realised I forgot to ping @SwisterTwister:. Sorry Brustopher (talk) 19:47, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
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.

July 9 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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 GlaxoSmithKline. (non-admin closure) Kraxler (talk) 16:03, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Horlicks NutriQuest[edit]

Horlicks NutriQuest (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Horlicks NutriQuest" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Non-notable mobile game app. Fails GNG. —teb728 t c 19:54, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerly HMSSolent)|lambast 00:42, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

This game has just released, hence the lack of notability. Plus it is only released in Pakistan. Give it some time —Frostbullet Frostbullet — Preceding undated comment added 03:39, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 17:23, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:24, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95 Talk 12:59, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
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. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:57, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Team Makati (AWS Dota 2 CGC Team)[edit]

Team Makati (AWS Dota 2 CGC Team) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Team Makati (AWS Dota 2 CGC Team)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Self-promotional and doesn't indicate the team's notability. Liz Read! Talk! 11:03, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 15:55, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:55, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:55, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete. (There's no need for the disambiguator on this article, and it doesn't follow conventions anyway—not supposed to use proper nouns in disambiguation.) Article topic lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. (?) It had zero hits in a video game reliable sources custom Google search and no coverage in The Daily Dot, our usual source for eSports. There are no worthwhile redirect targets. Please {{ping}} me you find more (non-English and offline) sources. Lots of these eSports team articles can go. They were added indiscriminately. – czar 17:14, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete as per nom. I would have CSD'd this Gbawden (talk) 18:36, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete per Czar's argument. I also agree that, if this somehow does survive AFD, it should be renamed. Sergecross73 msg me 12:42, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
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 N3V Games. Davewild (talk) 07:21, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Rail Sim Pro[edit]

Rail Sim Pro (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Rail Sim Pro" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Unreleased software by a long defunct company. Fails notability standards by a mile. Article was kept at AfD nine years ago, but notability standards have evolved since then and in any event, a decided plurality at the 1st AfD favored deletion. Good time as any to try again. Safiel (talk) 01:34, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Comment Not to mention entirely unsourced for all these years. Safiel (talk) 01:35, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 01:59, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:00, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
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.

July 8 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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 --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:28, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Xiphoid 9 - A Commodore 64 Game[edit]

Xiphoid 9 - A Commodore 64 Game (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Xiphoid 9 - A Commodore 64 Game" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

PROD tag removed. A Google search offers little to assert notability in the context of the general notability guideline. There does not appear to be a guideline for the notability of video games so I suppose that is the only one that is relevant. Thank you, ceradon (talkcontribs) 01:36, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 19:18, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:19, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete Nothing in the article is verified or (as far as I could find) verifiable. Verifiability is even more important than notability, although that also fails - for lack of sources. --MelanieN (talk) 22:47, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95 Talk 13:49, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete I consider myself a fan of the Commodore 64 and tend to be pretty knowledgable on the system and it's software. I've never heard of this game, and multiple sites I've gone to that cotain info on the Commodore 64 and its software turn up nothing on this. I can't see how this is remotely notable enough for inclusion. Wildthing61476 (talk) 18:14, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete: no coverage at all, possibly even a hoax. The only thing a Google search comes up with is the article and this AfD. Esquivalience t 00:59, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
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.

July 7 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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--Ymblanter (talk) 08:25, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Nevergrind[edit]

Nevergrind (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Nevergrind" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Fails WP:GNG/WP:WEB and WP:V: non-notable browser game with no references based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. The current sources are all primary (the official website and an interview without commentary), unreliable (Indie Game Mag and the previously-mentioned Cliqist, neither of which have any reputation as reliable sources), crowd-funded and user-submitted (IndieDB and Kickstarter), and portal sites (Crazy Games and Kongregate). I am unable to find any sources vetted by WikiProject Video games and searches using both the WPVG reliable and situational custom Google searches returned "No Results". A normal Google search finds the typical social media, forums, and spam sites. Note that the article creator, User:Maelfyn, is the self-described "developer of Nevergrind and founder of Neverworks Games". (I have also warned him about WP:COI. If the article survives AfD, it will have to be rewritten to remove POV and spammy language.) Ironically, the game looks fun—probably something I'd play if I weren't elbow deep in several other games—but that isn't currently part of our notability requirements. Woodroar (talk) 00:20, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) Woodroar (talk) 00:22, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete. Article topic lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. (?) It had no meaningful hits in a video game reliable sources custom Google search. There are no worthwhile redirect targets. Please me you find more (non-English and offline) sources. – czar 01:46, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete as per Woodroar. I couldn't find any additional sources, and certainly not any that were reliable and third-party. It's worth noting that Indie Game Mag's review lists at the bottom a call for developers to submit their games for possible feature, meaning that their process of selecting games to review is not particularly selective. Either way, a single review from a non-mainstream site does not establish notability. ~ RobTalk 01:47, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Agreed, it's not a great source at all. User:Czar actually started a discussion about IGM over a year ago with some solid arguments against. Woodroar (talk) 02:14, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:25, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:25, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete. I can't find anything to show that this game is ultimately notable enough for an article. It looks like it exists... and that's about it. If I thought that there would be a chance of this surviving AfD I'd re-write it, but I can't find anything that would show notability. I don't see where any of the typical gaming RS outlets have given this any media attention - not even a routine notification that the game is in production or that they held a Kickstarter campaign. (Although it's not for lack of trying - the game's creator does seem to be trying hard to drum up interest.) Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 04:48, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete. Please delete this article. Sorry for wasting your time. Thank you. Maelfyn (talk) 12:04, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
  • As a note to others who may be inclined to nominate for speedy deletion under G7, this is probably not eligible because an IP editor made substantial edits to the article. ~ RobTalk 13:42, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
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.

July 6 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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.  Sandstein  20:18, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Dunnet (video game)[edit]

Dunnet (video game) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Dunnet (video game)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Article topic lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. (?) It had no meaningful hits in a Google Books or video game reliable sources custom Google search. Best is that some technical books mention in a single sentence that it's a game built into another piece of software. It is not covered in any more depth by reliable sources. I'd entertain a redirect to GNU Emacs#Extensibility, where it is mentioned by name. I'd also entertain removing it from that article (where I do not think it adds to the topic) and deleting it altogether. Please ping me you find non-English and offline sources. – czar 13:42, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Have any reliable, secondary sources to back that up? – czar 16:41, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 16:09, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:09, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep(note for closer: COI exists but the editor is striving to maintain their objectivity) - (I am the author of the game - originally in 1983, so weigh that however you want). It is not only part of Emacs(and was not originally written as part of EMACS, but later adapted). Here is a web version: coolwanglu.github.io/dunnet.js/ .
  • Keep (preference#1) dedicated article plus briefly summarize contents within text_adventure#Notable_works, or alternatively merge-then-redirect (preference#2) to a new article-subsection text_adventure#Dunnet. Outright deletion of content from mainspace is incorrect since we have multiple WP:RS and many WP:NOTEWORTHY mentions; merging into Emacs is also incorrect since the videogame is a standalone component.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Davewild (talk) 19:10, 16 July 2015 (UTC)


  • Keep I fail to see why the CultOfMac, MacWorld, and LifeHacker articles (all of which are dedicated to the game entirely), plus all the other mentions and history, don't make this notable. II | (t - c) 02:52, 17 July 2015 (UTC) Note: An editor has expressed a concern that ImperfectlyInformed (talkcontribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. (diff)
There is only one article, the MacWorld listicle, which is a small, insignificant blurb that the other two retread. The rest is unreliable, original research. That is your depth of coverage. – czar 20:18, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
No. The 2005 MacWorld listicle,[117] expanded to the 2005 also-MacWorld dedicated article.[118][119] Years later, 2013 MacLife listicle,[120] expanded into two independent 2013 LifeHacker&CultOfMac dedicated articles.[121][122] Also, a dozen WP:NOTEWORTHY refs does not equate to 'WP:OR'. (Agree about the likelihood of canvassing, but you forgot to ping User:ImperfectlyInformed so they can respond.) 75.108.94.227 (talk) 02:11, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
I was not canvassed, but I did notice the AfD on reddit. Canvassing assumes that there is an agenda ("campaigning"), and we certainly aren't seeing much activity here from reddit. In any case, the last thing we need in Wikipedia is even less participation and fewer community members, and having been active since 2007, I have plenty of experience and understanding of Wikipedia's policies and I'm certainly not going to opt myself out of a thin discussion (which seems pretty clear to me) because I happened to see it on reddit.. II | (t - c) 05:02, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi i.i., thanks for your response. It is true that you need not self-disqualify, but there is pretty strong tension between the need to attract new editors to wikipedia, and the need to keep AfD from turning into a popularity contest, as opposed to a policy-based discussion of the merits of the sources. I would submit to you that AfD is *not* the place where new editors ought be encouraged to 'get involved' for their first foray into talkspace -- as you prolly know, AfD has a bit of a learning curve. However, the more significant question (for this particular AfD discussion) is whether you were in fact canvassed, by the person behind the reddit account that originally posted the thread there (reddit uid screaming_memes if memory serves). I believe you that YOU were not responding-to-canvassing, in the with-an-agenda sense, but canvassing is a two-way street. The author of Dunnet has been a participant here, Ron Schnell, and although they have been around wikipedia since 2006 or so, they definitely don't quite have all the wiki-policy-nuances down, and thus may have been publicly complaining in meatspace or on the interwebz, which could in turn be the cause of the reddit thread. Of course, it is also possible, momentarily ignoring WP:AGF for the sake of realism, that Ron himself is actually screaming_memes. Those are things we want to avoid, partly as a way to keep this relatively-thinly-attended AfD from devolving into a heavily-attended-but-zero-value AfD, and partly as a way to show Ron the 'correct' way to go about handling himself as a long-term-editor, who is valued and we wish to retain. There is also the possibility that I, or one of the other anons at this AfD, is behind screaming_memes; I am not the culprit. It looks like screaming_for_memes (actual reddit uid) was created 3 months ago, and is mostly about some alt-bitcoin clone, plus occasional wikipedia-related-rants; makes it unlikely they are specific to *this* AfD, albeit not impossible. Ping User:Aviators99, do you know how the reddit thread at [123] originated? See WP:MEATPUPPET for why it matters. Thanks. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 05:08, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
No, I do not. I learned about the thread from Twitter. Ron Schnell 19:49, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
  • comment After discussion with User:Czar on usertalk, have aggressively collapsed most of the back-n-forth above. Please see, known sources here, and fact-extraction here. My basic position is that two-and-a-half bursts of coverage including several international-press sources in 2005/2007/2013, and minor mentions in WP:RS since 1994, adds up to WP:N. Czar's major concern, as I understand it, is that we have too little depth to really meet WP:N, especially WP:SIGCOV, and Czar thus believes we'll have to engage in WP:SYNTH and/or WP:OR, which I believe is a misplaced worry. Can some other editors check over the sources, and help us out of our logjam, please? 75.108.94.227 (talk) 14:09, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep There is enough coverage in reliable sources provided by 75.108.94.227 (talk · contribs) here to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline.

    Here is detailed coverage in The Cult of Mac (linkWebCite):

    The game is called Dunnet written by Ron Schnell, and it’s not exclusive to OS X: it ships on all every modern version of UNIX, upon which OS X is based. I haven’t gotten very far, but apparently, the game becomes quite surreal, and the major twist is that players are actually walking around inside a UNIX system, not a simulacrum of a real-life game world! Real-life people wandering around inside a UNIX system? Sounds pretty cyberpunk to me.

    To access the built-in text adventure, just open Terminal under your Applications > Utilities directory and enter:

    emacs -batch -l dunnet

    The game will load, and you’ll find yourself “at a dead end of a dirt road. The road goes to the east. In the distance you can see that it will eventually fork off. The trees here are very tall royal palms, and they are spaced equidistant from each other. There is a shovel here.”

    If you’ve never played a text adventure, a la Zork or Hitchhiker’s Guide To The Galaxy, it’s pretty easy. Everything is done with text! You can, for example, type “get shovel” to pick up that shovel, or “east” to head east. “Help” will give you any other commands.

    Here is coverage in Macworld (linkWebCite):

    To play dunnet, all you need is a Terminal window and an open mind—you’d be amazed at what kinds of images your mind can draw, given the basic descriptions provided by the game itself. Launch Terminal (in /Applications: Utilities) and type (or copy and paste!) this, followed by the Return key:

    emacs -batch -l dunnet

    That’s right; dunnet is sort of hiding inside of the emacs text editor. When the game starts up, you’ll see the output above (excluding the get shovel bit—consider that your first clue). From this point on, you’re really on your own, but here are a few basic commands to help get you started:

    [list of commands]

    Here is coverage in de:Falkemedia's tech.de (linkWebCite):

    Etwas anspruchsvoller ist das textbasierte Abenteuerspiel Dunnet, das stark an die Anfangszeiten der PC-Spiele aus den 80ern erinnert. Um es zu starten, öffnet man ein Terminal-Fenster, und gibt "emacs·-batch-l·dunnet" ein. Die Kommunikation muss in Englisch geführt werden. Tipp: Mit dem Befehl "inventory" sieht man alle Gegenstände, die man mit sich herumträgt. Um den Spielstand zu sichern, gibt man "save" ein. Mit "restore" setzt man ein unterbrochenes Spiel fort. Eine gute Idee ist auch, "help" einzutippen, falls man nicht mehr weiter weiß.

    Google Translate translation (link):

    Something more challenging is the text-based adventure game Dunnet that the early days of PC games from the 80s is very similar. To start it, you open a terminal window, and are "emacs · -batch-length Dunnet" a. The communication must be conducted in English. Tip: Use the "Inventory" command you can see all items that you carries around with him. In order to secure the game, you are "save" a. With "Restore" If you continue a paused game. A good idea is also "help" to type, if you do not know how to continue.

    There is enough material to verify that:
    1. the game was created by Ron Schnell in the 1980s
    2. that it's shipped on every modern version of UNIX
    3. that the game involves players walking around inside a UNIX system
    4. that it's hidden inside the Emacs text editor
    5. that it can be run through the terminal using the command "emacs -batch -l dunnet"
    6. instructions about how to play the game

    Cunard (talk) 01:16, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

@Cunard, aren't these three paragraphs virtually identical? And are these six points enough to constitute significant coverage? – czar 01:31, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
  • The three articles are not virtually identical. The first article provides detailed commentary of the game, while the other two sources do not. The German-language source verifies that the game was created by Ron Schnell in the 1980s, while the second source does not mention Schnell or when the game was created. From WP:SIGCOV:

    "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it need not be the main topic of the source material.

    Based on the six points I listed above, I think these three sources "addres[s] the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content". There is enough material for a stub or start-class article about this topic. Cunard (talk) 03:00, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
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.

July 5 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. ceradon (talkcontribs) 04:42, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Gon' E-Choo! (video game)[edit]

Gon' E-Choo! (video game) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Gon' E-Choo! (video game)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Unable to establish notability. Game lacks significant coverage from reliable secondary sources. The1337gamer (talk) 22:39, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) The1337gamer (talk) 22:42, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

What more sources do you think are needed? Examples? Jsaiya (talk) 23:00, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

The problem at the moment is establishing notability. That source, along with the one on the article aren't enough to satisfy WP:GNG. It would be more appropriate for you to improve the article in the Draft namespace in case this is an example of WP:TOOSOON. Then it can be reviewed and submitted later. --The1337gamer (talk) 23:47, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
That Italian site looks like a blog, which doesn't count as a reliable source. We should only revisit this once the game is covered by vetted video game sources. – czar 00:04, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:55, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete: If even by the horribly loose standards of VG/RS there aren't any qualifying sources, this is at *least* a TOOSOON. Fails the GNG. Nha Trang Allons! 11:25, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete per above. –323MU (talk) 21:13, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
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 Kelton Flinn. (non-admin closure)Davey2010Talk 05:54, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Air (1977 video game)[edit]

Air (1977 video game) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Air (1977 video game)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Not notable, or even verifiable. For a "major" title with lasting influence, I'm having an extremely difficult time finding a single reliable source. While this claims that the game is lost, I am unable to verify that this has ever existed. The only source I have thus far been able to find is this, which is hardly confirmation of its existence. With the lack of information (a "major" title would surely have something out there on the internet), I can only conclude that either this game vanished without trace long ago, or it's a hoax. Adam9007 (talk) 00:23, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerly HMSSolent)|lambast 01:18, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Kelton Flinn. It looks like this article had a reference at one point that was deleted here. I'm unsure why. In any event, the reference (link to actual page of book can be found here). At a minimum, the article doesn't appear to be a hoax. That said, I don't think there's any evidence it passes muster as notable, and given that it's already mentioned in our article on the game's creator, I think we should redirect there. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 02:51, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 12:42, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:43, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Redirect per Ginseng's logic. (Wish I read their post before independently confirming the page's one citation myself...) Redirects to the company or to Air Warrior‍‍ '​‍s development would also suffice, but it perhaps belongs most in Flinn's history. There does not appear to be much other coverage on the subject, and it can always spin out summary style if need be. Please ping me you find more (non-English and offline) sources. – czar 18:01, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Kelton Flinn - software (game) article of unclear notability, lacking significant coverage. Game is sufficiently historically notable to justify redirect to programmer, and additional refs can be added there if found.Dialectric (talk) 01:59, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
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.

July 4 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 00:02, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Neko Atsume[edit]

Neko Atsume (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Neko Atsume" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Barely translated, and little to indicate notability Jac16888 Talk 08:53, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Weak keep but strong WP:TNT before anything for the horrid machine-translation-like prose. The app attracted some attention from Japanese press as a fad sort of like Flappy Bird did. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 10:56, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

No relevance to any other entry or current need or topic of interest. Please delete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amaedel (talkcontribs) 16:13, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 12:00, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:00, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:00, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep I have added some sources, I agree that a rewrite may be appropriate. Artw (talk) 13:33, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep Substantial coverage in English and Japanese, easily to indicate notability, and some improvements have been made already. —innotata 06:38, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
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. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 00:19, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Liberation 71[edit]

Liberation 71 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Liberation 71" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

WP:N, the article does not have any reliable source to demonstrate notability. AdrianGamer (talk) 09:47, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 11:05, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:05, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:05, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep: As the article itself lists more than 5 different news agencies reports on it, there cannot be any doubt to its notability! – Nahiyan8 (talk | contribs) 18:33, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep: The article has multiple independent reliable sources. Original reason for nomination is invalid.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 01:12, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep The article is well sourced. Ibrahim Husain Meraj (talk) 04:32, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
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. North America1000 00:18, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Lucas the Game[edit]

Lucas the Game (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Lucas the Game" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Fails WP:GNG. Unable to find significant coverage from reliable secondary sources. The1337gamer (talk) 22:26, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) The1337gamer (talk) 22:58, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:24, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete for now and draft/userfy if anyone wants but for a game that was released not even a week ago, searches found nothing to suggest the slightest good third-party coverage. SwisterTwister talk 04:50, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
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.

July 2 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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 Broken Sword 5: The Serpent's Curse. MBisanz talk 04:10, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Jasmine (song)[edit]

Jasmine (song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Jasmine (song)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

No indication of notability. Mentioned on a handful of websites, can't even be found on the web. No indication of sales success, awards, etc. Non-notable. Bueller 007 (talk) 04:05, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Delete Prima face failure of WP:NSONG, does not register on WP:GNG either. Hasteur (talk) 16:37, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. North America1000 23:58, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 01:40, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
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.

July 1 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. Opabinia regalis (talk) 06:00, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Hex Empires[edit]

Hex Empires (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Hex Empires" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

WP:N, not a notable title. No reliable source available to prove notability AdrianGamer (talk) 05:29, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
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 merge to Demon's Souls. Selective merge per postdif. This seems like an unlikely search term, so leaving a redirect behind doesn't seem required (but I'll leave that up to whoever does the merge). -- RoySmith (talk) 13:03, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

It has been pointed out to me that leaving the redirect is a requirement of Wikipedia:Merge and delete, so whoever does the merge, please do that. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:21, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

List of Demon's Souls characters[edit]

List of Demon's Souls characters (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "List of Demon's Souls characters" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

WP:LISTCRUFT: The list was created just for the sake of having such a list, the content is unverifiable or the underlying concept is non-notable. Also WP:FANCRUFT. No reliable secondary sources covering these characters. No indication of notability or importance outside the scope of the video game article. The1337gamer (talk) 09:10, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) The1337gamer (talk) 09:15, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete or Redirect - Fails our notability guidelines, content more akin to something that would belong on a Wikia. Sergecross73 msg me 13:04, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:33, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:33, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • WP:SMERGE to Demon's Souls, which has no section for its characters at present. I'm always confused when people believe that the content of a notable work is somehow unverifiable, which would only be the case if all existing copies were destroyed. Or it rests on a misunderstanding of WP:OR that would forbid us from consulting primary sources ourselves (which we may consult, so long as we are only making "straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge."). Basic descriptions of video game characters can always be sourced to the game itself and its manual(s) (both from the game designer and from third-parties), and also often to reviews that describe the notable game. postdlf (talk) 15:30, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Merge with redirect as suggested. VMS Mosaic (talk) 04:24, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 30 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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 Ship Simulator. This should've been BOLDLY done by the nom but hey ho all done now. (non-admin closure)Davey2010Talk 00:19, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Ship Simulator Professional[edit]

Ship Simulator Professional (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Ship Simulator Professional" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Unsourced low-quality content of questionable notability and usefulness, written like a product description and feature list. No lead section. MopSeeker (talk) 23:24, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89(T·E·C) 02:46, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Redirect - to Ship Simulator or developer VSTEP. Software article of unclear notability, lacking independent references, but the series of games is notable and the developer is borderline.Dialectric (talk) 17:02, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 19:46, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Ship Simulator, which houses the series. Please consider performing easy redirects yourself before coming to AfD. @MopSeeker, if you'll withdraw, I'll redirect it myself. – czar 21:18, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
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. No opinion on the redirect but anyone can create it. Ricky81682 (talk) 20:15, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Modoka[edit]

Modoka (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Modoka" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Article topic lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. (?) It had no meaningful hits in a video game reliable sources custom Google search (as "Modoka", "Modoka Studios", or "Lumodokate Studios". All in-page sources are primary or unreliable. There are no worthwhile redirect targets as none of the games are notable. Please ping me you find more (non-English and offline) sources. – czar 14:10, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89(T·E·C) 02:36, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 18:53, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:53, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:54, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:54, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95 Talk 17:18, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
This may be a stretch but could a redirect to Madoka work a misspelling?--69.157.254.210 (talk) 05:09, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
@69.157.254.210, a misspelling of what? – czar 05:36, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
The possibility that's Modoka could be a misspelling of Madoka. I have no idea how viable that might be but I though it was worth it to at least suggest the possibility.--67.68.29.1 (talk) 02:02, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Just to note, my IP has recently changed So I am the same person that initially mentioned the misspelling idea.--67.68.29.1 (talk) 02:07, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
It's possible but when I search Google or even WP, it's hard to tell if Madoka is being misspelled as Modoka. If you can confirm that it's happening, sure, throw up a redirect after this is deleted. (And be sure to add {{R from misspelling}}.) – czar 03:52, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
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. Considering that after sources were unearthed by Phil, all the !votes were to keep (and one "delete" changed to "keep", albeit weak), it is not implausible to think the other commenters who opined to "delete" might similarly reconsider, which sways this closure towards keep instead of what would clearly be a "no consensus".  · Salvidrim! ·  03:49, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

37Games[edit]

37Games (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "37Games" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)
(Find sources: "三七互娱" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR) (Chinese)
(Find sources: "37游戏" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR) (Chinese)

Fails WP:GNG, WP:NCORP. Outside of press releases this company lacks significant coverage from reliable secondary sources. The1337gamer (talk) 15:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) The1337gamer (talk) 15:29, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. The1337gamer (talk) 15:31, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Weak keep. I'm unable to check the quality of the Chinese-language sources, but I defer to Phil's assessment of them with his experience in the area. This said, I still have no idea what kind of coverage these sources contain (press releases? original reporting? blurbs? full articles?), apart from that I now have links from major outlets. – czar 16:47, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
It clearly asserts notability in the second paragraph ("38th amongst top 100 internet companies in China", "second biggest browser game platform"), though as long as the references fail to load, it's unsubstantiated and nevertheless lacking reliable, secondary coverage. Still good enough for defeating the speedy. – czar 14:27, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • don't delete just change two reference source Czar mentioned that are failed to load.I changing them to article of portals of Tencent and Sina, which rank no.2 and no.4 traffic among Chinese websites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gamefant (talkcontribs) 02:03, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
If the company is significant for those rankings, where is the reliable, secondary source coverage? Can you help us find Chinese-language sources? – czar 19:27, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Have you check those two newly added article i mentioned above, which are mainly talking about the ranking and market share. Are they reliable, secondary source coverage? Besides, just find one coverage from Forbes, http://www.forbes.com/sites/russellflannery/2015/05/07/new-online-game-billionaire-clan-emerges-in-china/. Sanqi Interactive Entertainment is official name of the whole group. This name could be found at the bottom of 37.com. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goodmanishere (talkcontribs) 04:30, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Being included on that list of top Internet companies doesn't count for much on its own. We're finding mostly press releases or passing mentions (such as inclusion in a list) for this company (at least as "37Games" or "37.com"—we might find more if we use the "Sanqi" name), such that we don't have complete evidence of significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources. (?) We need to have actual non-press release content in order to write a balanced article, otherwise it's better off redirected or deleted. Forbes would be a start, but it's more usable for an article about Sanqi than about 37Games, no? And I'm having trouble establishing whether the short QQ and People.cn short articles are (1) reputable and (2) discuss the company in more than a passing fashion. – czar 13:09, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
"Sanqi" actually is the Chinese pronunciation of 37. – [user talk:goodmanishere] 11:09, 7 July 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goodmanishere (talkcontribs)
  • Keep I was intending to close this as delete but after some digging there are a raft of reliable sources out there in Chinese. Pace avoidance of systematic bias, it is notable and should be kept. Note that the Chinese article (now linked) has been tagged for the equivalent to WP:PROMO since December 2014, which means that it too needs better sourcing. I've added Chinese searches for sources so others can get an idea of the coverage out there—also pinging Czar per his request above.  Philg88 talk 06:42, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
@Philg88, thanks for this. I'm not familiar with Chinese-language reliable sources. Which of those hits are reputable, and not just rehashes of press releases? (Or is there a list of such domains somewhere in project space, perhaps something on par with WP:VG/RS?) Could you help with my QQ/People.cn question above? – czar 13:09, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
@Czar: News stories with in depth coverage here from 163.com, and here from Sina Corp. I don't know about RS for video games but there is certainly sufficient coverage in "mainstream" sources. Don't forget, the reliable sources don't need to be cited in the article - they only need to exist. Cheers,  Philg88 talk 15:25, 6 July 2015 (UTC):Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:19, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:19, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:19, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Philg88 talk 06:42, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep There is enough coverage in reliable sources to make this article pass WP:ORG. I found and added a news source in just 5 seconds. I also found coverage in Chinese language, as already pointed by Phil. The subject passes our notability threshold. Jim Carter 13:10, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
@Jim Carter, you added what is unabashedly a press release... Certainly not reliable, independent, or a "news source". Others may exist, but that's exactly why we're searching. – czar 13:35, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Philg88 talk 15:17, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
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 37Games. Redirect will obviously be deleted if 37Games is deleted at its AfD. Jenks24 (talk) 06:30, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Dragon Atlas[edit]

Dragon Atlas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Dragon Atlas" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

An article about a not notable video game which does not credibly claim the significance of the game in question. --Anarchyte 11:49, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Delete. 37Games is about to be deleted, so there are no worthwhile redirection targets. – czar 19:21, 4 July 2015 (UTC) Reinstating the redirect opinion—looks like there are enough Chinese-language sources to keep the dev article in some form. – czar 12:57, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete Fails WP:GNG. I would say redirect to 37Games, but I think that fails notability too so I've nominated that for deletion also. --The1337gamer (talk) 15:26, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
It's standard to redirect, then, and if the dev is deleted, all pages that redirect there will be deleted as well. – czar 15:44, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) The1337gamer (talk) 15:27, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:10, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Redirect to 37Games. Software article of unclear notability, lacking significant RS refs, but developer may be notable and is a reasonable redirect target.Dialectric (talk) 06:00, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Redirect to 37Games as a reasonable search term. North America1000 01:01, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 29 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. Davewild (talk) 07:22, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Red Crucible[edit]

Red Crucible (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Red Crucible" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Non-notable video game, given references don't prove notability. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 17:21, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 18:06, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:07, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:07, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95 Talk 13:58, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 28 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Isolation of the dead[edit]

Isolation of the dead (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Isolation of the dead" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Fails WP:GNG; non-notable game. This game is still in the process of funding on Kickstarter, which makes this article a crystal ball at best. Esquivalience t 17:48, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerly HMSSolent)|lambast 01:21, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete. I wish them well, but right now this just doesn't pass notability guidelines. There just isn't any coverage out there for this game and since this is still in its fundraising stage, there likely isn't anything other than a few play screens and maybe at best a non-playable test stage. If this gets made and gains coverage it can be created, but offhand this is just too soon for an entry. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 04:12, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 04:09, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:10, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 27 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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 Zynga#Real-money_gaming. Black Kite (talk) 21:47, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

ZyngaPlusCasino[edit]

ZyngaPlusCasino (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "ZyngaPlusCasino" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Not notable. It got a little press upon launch in 2013 but since then nothing. Every game that gets a few tech blogs to write about their launch is not worthy of an article. Handpolk ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 13:46, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 02:52, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:52, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:52, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Zynga#Real-money_gaming as a useful redirect term. Some really shoddy AfD work above! First, notability is not temporary, so if a game once received lots of coverage, enough to write an article or to establish its importance, we don't stop caring because the game goes offline. Second, "simply not notable" is an unsubstantiated argument. Now for the sources:
This is all from a simple video game reliable sources custom Google search. With a little more digging, we could support a small article on Zynga's casino games foray, but for now it can be built in the Zynga article summary style. – czar 15:05, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm fine with the re-direct and if you want to copy over the content to the Zynga article. Handpolk ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 16:09, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Redirect - Holy shit this AFD looks exactly like the other one literally ... Face-grin.svg, Anyway seems better to redirect than delete. –Davey2010Talk 02:52, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
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 and redirect to Zynga#Real-money_gaming. Black Kite (talk) 21:49, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

ZyngaPlus Poker[edit]

ZyngaPlus Poker (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "ZyngaPlus Poker" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Not notable. The game got a little press when it was released but since then nothing and I'm fairly certain it is near-dead. Handpolk ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 13:42, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 02:46, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:47, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:47, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Zynga#Real-money_gaming as a useful redirect term. Some really shoddy AfD work above! First, notability is not temporary, so if a game once received lots of coverage, enough to write an article or to establish its importance, we don't stop caring because the game goes offline. Do sources exist or not? They do:
This is all from a simple video game reliable sources custom Google search. With a little more digging, we could support a small article on Zynga's casino games foray, but for now it can be built in the Zynga article summary style. A redirect on a major game from a major games company should seem obvious. – czar 15:07, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
I'd be fine with the re-direct and if you like you can just copy over the content to that section of the Zynga article? Handpolk ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 16:07, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
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. Davewild (talk) 17:48, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Joe Weller[edit]

Joe Weller (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Joe Weller" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

I don't think that 2,000,000 subscribers meet the notability guideline. other youtubers have over 10,000,000 subs and have articles. but not this article. Fazbear7891 (talk) 21:33, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerly HMSSolent)|lambast 02:06, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerly HMSSolent)|lambast 02:06, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak delete. From the video games commentator side, the article topic lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources (?) with no meaningful hits in a video game reliable sources custom Google search. As a YouTube celebrity, there are a few short articles and several British papers refer to him in passing as a "star" or "celebrity". He caused quite an uproar at a charity event. He appears best known for a viral video about WWE finishing moves and related videos about WWE, FIFA, and being a public nuisance. From the reputable, non-tabloids, though, there isn't much coverage apart from that he made popular videos online. When Weller may have YouTube hits, but we can't feasibly write an article about him until he is covered by secondary, reliable sources—otherwise it's all primary sources, as his WP page currently is. There are no worthwhile redirect targets. Please ping me you find more (non-English and offline) sources. – czar 15:23, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95 Talk 13:28, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 26 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. --MelanieN (talk) 21:19, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Rememoried[edit]

Rememoried (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Rememoried" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

No indication of importance, might be WP:TOOSOON for an article. --Anarchyte 07:55, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Delete I found this short Hardcore Gamer coverage, but nothing beyond that. Sam Walton (talk) 08:07, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:34, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
There is not enough coverage to write a dedicated article and there are no worthwhile redirect targets. Please ping me you find more (non-English and offline) sources. – czar 15:10, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 24 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. Given that this is an old game, recreation of this article would be reasonable if sources were uncovered. Sam Walton (talk) 13:57, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Gapper (video game)[edit]

Gapper (video game) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Gapper (video game)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

No WP:RSs (only Google Books hit just mentions in passing, no news, websites are just legally grey abandonware sites), fails WP:GNG. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:29, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict)This has been added, which is not a legally grey abandonware site, but the primary purpose of slider.com does not appear to be an encyclopedia (rather a search engine), and I cannot find out who their editors, authors, contributors, or sources are. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:39, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I have since updated the article to include additional references and content about the game, which I believe is of value worth keeping within Wikipedia. The mentioned Google Book hit above is not talking about this game and is not relevant. It was a MS-DOS product created back in 1986 and was a PC game that many people loved. If you look at a simple Google search, you will see any number of hits related to this game: [[140]]. Angrygreenfrogs (talk) 21:36, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

The number of hits on Google does not indicate whether a subject is notable -- books actually do a better job of that. You added one source, which cannot be demonstrated to be reliable. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:39, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I've cleaned up the article, removed anything that could be called original research, added 5 sources, including one from Mobygames, which is more relevant. Beyond that it'll simply be a personal judgement call as to relevance. Angrygreenfrogs (talk) 21:57, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

The following sources do not meet our reliability standards, and are legally grey abandonware sites: Demu, theisozone, MyAbandonWare. theisozone appears to have plagiarized Mobygames.
Mobygames is not reliable.
You need to provide evidence that Slider is written and edited by qualified individuals. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:16, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I admit, MobyGames and Slider are the best sources of information about Gapper. If they are unacceptable sources, then I'd be stuck there. The author of the article on MobyGames is original content and was written by this guy: http://www.mobygames.com/user/sheet/userSheetId,49363/ and unfortunately I can't find any information about the author of the article on Slider. Angrygreenfrogs (talk) 14:08, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 20:09, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:09, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
This paper is the full citation of the passing mention in the nom. – czar 15:30, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 22 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. JohnCD (talk) 11:14, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Next-Gen Text[edit]

Next-Gen Text (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Next-Gen Text" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Fails WP:GNG, no coverage whatsoever. Also possible conflict of interest and advertising. Article author claims to be the developer and copyright holder of the game through the logo image description. The1337gamer (talk) 09:55, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) The1337gamer (talk) 09:59, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:55, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete - Software article of unclear notability, lacking independent references. A search turned up no significant WP:RS coverage of this game. Article was created by an SPA as possibly promotional. Also WP:CRYSTAL issues, as this is unreleased.Dialectric (talk) 19:17, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete, no indication of importance and has no references. --Anarchyte 08:30, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 21 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. North America1000 00:13, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Awakening of Heroes[edit]

Awakening of Heroes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Awakening of Heroes" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

non notable game Gaijin42 (talk) 16:22, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerly HMSSolent)|lambast 00:10, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 00:42, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:42, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete - Software (game) article of unclear notability, lacking independent references. A search turned up no significant WP:RS coverage of this game. Article was created by an SPA as possibly promotional. Also WP:CRYSTAL issues, as this is game is still in testing. Dialectric (talk) 19:28, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete – Fails WP:GNG. --The1337gamer (talk) 19:33, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
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. Not sure there is valid reason for a redirect, that discussion would best be held at the Sega article. No bar against if if there is a consensus for such. Dennis Brown - 00:04, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Masami Ishikawa[edit]

Masami Ishikawa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Masami Ishikawa" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Doubtful notability, man with a job The Banner talk 01:32, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 23:25, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:25, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:25, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:30, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete - Lack of third party sources covering the subject on specific detail. Sources currently in article don't do this. ;They focus on the product, not the person - the subject here.) Also okay with merge/redirect to some Sega related article. Sergecross73 msg me 02:11, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep - Sorry, but I don't agree with the case presented here. The Polygon piece in the article represents an in-depth interview with Ishikawa (which is actually a book excerpt), as does the other source. Yes, they're focusing on the hardware - but that's because they're interviewing him specifically on those topics, and on his involvement with them. Whilst this may not satisfy the most common interpretations of GNG, I feel it certainly satisfies the spirit of the guideline, and probably the letter of it as well. Factor in the fact that he was head of the development team of major consoles with Sega, and it seems only sensible to have some kind of article. It is also worth noting that Japanese sources are pretty much guaranteed to exist, although I lack the ability to actually search for them myself with any degree of accuracy. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 19:54, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Lukeno94, interviews aren't typically considered secondary coverage though. Masami Ishikawa's words on Masami Ishikawa is considered a first party account. I mean, if there's more/better sources out there to flesh out an article, I could be swayed, but as long as its a few sentences based off of an interview or two, the best care scenario should be a redirect/merge to something Sega related. Sergecross73 msg me 21:05, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I know they're not typically considered secondary coverage, and I will freely admit I'm voting with a liberal interpretation of GNG based on what I feel the spirit of the guideline is. Given that he has been sought out for interviews on the globally significant Mega Drive/Genesis project, and his role in that project, I do believe he justifies an article. I wouldn't be opposed to a redirect being in place if consensus does swing away from keeping this article; outright deletion seems a tad daft. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 21:14, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Easy redirect to Sega Genesis, where he is mentioned by name and for which he is best known. Article topic lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. (?) The best hit, the Polygon interview, is not ABOUT him but the Genesis, for which (again) he is best known. There simply isn't enough extant (or easily extant) material such that we can write a full article about the individual. He had no meaningful hits in a video game reliable sources custom Google search and doesn't have a page on jawp that we could scrape either. Please ping me you find more (non-English and offline) sources. – czar 15:35, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete - Agree with Czar and Sergecross73 here. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 19:16, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Sega Genesis Heyyouoverthere (talk) 07:24, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete He is mentioned there , but just mentioned. That's not enough to justify a redirect. DGG (at NYPL) -- reply here 23:48, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
He led the project's development and it's a quite a major project at that. He's "mentioned" several times by name. It's a useful redirect as a search term. – czar 00:03, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
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 Sega AM2. The history is preserved, so if anybody wants to mine this for material to merge somewhere, have at it. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:54, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Hisashi Suzuki[edit]

Hisashi Suzuki (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Hisashi Suzuki" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Doubtful notability, man with a job The Banner talk 01:29, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Delete: Does not pass notability for a biographical subject, but it's possible to selectively merge information to Sega to ensure that the critical nugget is preserved -- that this man oversaw the electro-mechanical gaming division (pinball and the like). Hithladaeus (talk) 01:58, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
  • At least refactor to be about anthropologist ja:鈴木尚, and perhaps dab with the past Square (company) president (redlink at jawp) if there is enough to write about him. There are many possible ways to put that romanized name back into Japanese, and hence can refer to a lot of people. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 11:30, 21 June 2015 (UTC) (no relation BTW)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 23:23, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:23, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:23, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
So while I think redirection is best for now (with no added effort), I would support anyone who wants to later overwrite this title with an article about the former Square Enix president or Japanese anthropologist. – czar 15:42, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
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. North America1000 02:29, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Shei baba[edit]

Shei baba (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Shei baba" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Unencyclopaedic article about a Call of Duty player. Not sure that's notable enough to warrant a Wikipedia article. Adam9007 (talk) 00:19, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Delete: Fails GNG by a wide margin. Even the ONEEVENT doesn't pass GNG, and the one event would only vouch for a team. Coverage of the team would only vouch for the pseudonym. Coverage of the pseudonym even would not create coverage of the real name user -- much less one without a capitalized last name. Hithladaeus (talk) 01:55, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete as probable hoax: no coverage by any source (even self-published). Esquivalience t 04:28, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete Possible autobiography, with no notability able to be established (i.e. no hits on GNews). Note that the alleged real name "Chinmoy Roy" associates with multiple people, and a Bengali Indian actor currently takes its primary topic (though not at the best standing). 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 07:15, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 23:20, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:20, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:21, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 19 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

List of Call of Duty characters[edit]

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 and cleanup: Most of the Delete notes relate to cruftiness or issues with this being a game guide or coverage limitations. I agree with all of these things, but I think that a major trimming would help a great deal. For instance, looking at the first set (for Call of Duty), there are characters listed which are not included by a single mention in the game's article; all such instances should be eliminated. Further, many of the descriptions are extensive, while they should not go beyond what the character's description is in the specific game article. Each section needs to have the "main" template added, at least, and if mention of the character is restricted to a single section, this should be included in the line item. Citation support should be provided in both the game article and here ... and that being a requirement the vast majority of the content here will be eliminated. I was tempted to indicated "delete" but there is a path to cleanup for a suitable standalone list.. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 19:41, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

List of Call of Duty characters (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "List of Call of Duty characters" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) requirement. Majority of the content on this list is unreferenced and seems to be WP:OR. The few references that can be found either come from primary sources (the game itself), or contain characters which have their own articles. WP:LISTN requires that we should at least be able to present some sources that discuss the topic itself, and I am not seeing any reliable sources that discuss the "CoD characters". WP:LISTPEOPLE requires that items on the list should be notable in itself, something that most of the characters here (if not all) fail. Keep in mind that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXITS is not a valid criteria. I'd appreciate comments on why this list is appropriate for Wikipedia. Finally: keep in mind there is a place for this kind of fan stuff - the http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Call_of_Duty_Wiki Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:34, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Keep - Coverage cannot be glossed as the references and external links currently in use in the article. This article is poorly referenced and probably much longer than it ought to be, but there are plenty of secondary sources that could be used on this article that simply haven't been added. A Google News search for "Call of Duty characters" turns up several pages of results, and searches for individual character names would undoubtedly turn up many more. Neelix (talk) 17:07, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete - I'm not getting a GNG passing vibe either. The lack of referencing definitely eg the imdb link for Sgt Wallcroft only confirms the voice actor not the content. GraemeLeggett (talk) 19:06, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete WP:LISTCRUFT, a useless list of characters. The page isn't required. --Anarchyte 04:15, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
  • eteleD WP:GAMEGUIDE Wikipedia is not a video game guide. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 07:29, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep We can't keep up with each characters' names and biographies in each Call of Duty game articles and this article would make it easy for that propose. If you want, you can find some external sources for those characters, like you seen in Characters of God of War. BattleshipMan (talk) 23:34, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
That could be read as an appeal to WP:OtherStuffExists, there would have to be good referencing, more than just mentions. GraemeLeggett (talk) 05:59, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Do you think there should be an appeal about that to WP:OtherStuffExists? BattleshipMan (talk) 06:18, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
  • "We can't keep up with each characters' names and biographies in each Call of Duty game articles..." Why on earth not? I don't at all understand what that's supposed to mean.

    "...like you seen in Characters of God of War..." The characters in the God of War franchise actually recur in multiple games, and those games are supposed to comprise a coherent fictional world or narrative. There is therefore informational value to gathering the characters together as they actually all relate to each other, as well as formatting value to having one central page for topics (the characters) that pertain to multiple articles. Not so here, as I've explained below. postdlf (talk) 16:49, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 19:03, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:04, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:04, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment (or tentative delete). Some of the rationales given so far rest upon incorrect interpretations of guidelines or policies. WP:LISTN is not a "requirement" of all lists but instead only one way of analyzing lists (as it makes clear in its own text). It would also be difficult for a game to achieve notability without having any sources describe its characters (see, e.g., review including extensive commentary on characters for most recent game here, found in our article on that game). WP:LISTPEOPLE only applies to lists of real people, not lists of fictional people, so to whatever extent there is the expectation that lists of people only contain notable people (and even for real people, that depends on the list), that has no relevance here. It is instead standard practice to have lists of characters for notable franchises (for video games and for other types of media) where the characters do not merit standalone articles as a WP:SPLIT from the main franchise article. And merely describing the content of a primary source such as a video game does not constitute OR.

    That said, as best as I can tell none of the characters appear in more than one game. The franchise does not establish a shared fictional universe, but instead the narratives from one to another have nothing in common beyond sharing the same historic war settings. This definitely distinguishes this list from others like it, as that means there's really no informational utility to grouping all of the separate games' characters together. It would then be sufficient for each separate game article to internally list that game's characters. Unless I'm missing something here...? postdlf (talk) 21:04, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95 (Talk) 18:49, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep This article shows the proper approach: making a combination article for characters in a major work, instead of on one hand trying to put it all in the main article or on the other hand tryign to write separate articles. It's the correct density of coverage. DGG ( talk ) 20:48, 26 June 2015 (UTC) a good
    • Only they're not from a work; see my comment above. The separate articles already exist in the form of the articles on each game, which should each list their own internally unique and unshared characters. In light of that, what do you think is gained by grouping them together? postdlf (talk) 21:03, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak delete: Although Call of Duty characters as a group are notable per the coverage, I think this goes out of the scope of game articles. Esquivalience t 22:32, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete: per WP:GAMEGUIDE, very key characters could be moved to the main article. Azealia911 talk 15:36, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
    • There is a problem. Call of Duty is not one game, it's multiples and there are main articles of each games of that series. BattleshipMan (talk) 16:24, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
Then include the characters from each game at the games respective article. Azealia911 talk 17:11, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 18 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. Soft deletion equivalent to an uncontested PROD. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  16:02, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Brutal Gamer[edit]

Brutal Gamer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Brutal Gamer" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Non-notable video game blog. Fails WP:GNG and WP:WEB. The1337gamer (talk) 23:55, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) The1337gamer (talk) 00:01, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. The1337gamer (talk) 00:01, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95 (Talk) 14:25, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 16 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. Especially in light of the new sources unearthed during the AfD.  · Salvidrim! ·  16:33, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

JackSepticEye[edit]

JackSepticEye (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "JackSepticEye" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

No real indication of importance, written more like an advert than a WP:BLP. As the article currently stands, it's a basic example of what most other YouTube personalities do. All or most of the references are promotional, leading back to his YouTube account and videos. Requesting deletion per WP:NOTWHOSWHO. --Anarchyte 08:54, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 12:09, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 12:09, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
  • For the record, sources #1 and #3 link to the same exact article, and source #2 is an extremely minor passing mention. So, you've really only provided one source that provides significant coverage, on the assumption "Irish Examiner" is a reliable sources. (I've never heard of it, so I don't know either way.) Sergecross73 msg me 15:54, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oops! Sometimes I open too many tabs and accidentally paste the same URL twice - sorry about that. Anyway here are two more: [144], [145]. Also the one you called an extremely minor passing mention has this:

    However, the star of all Irish YouTubers is JackSepticEye aka Seán Mclaughlin, who is ranked in the top 100 in the world. Mclaughlin (25), who also makes a living talking his way through videogames, has accumulated 1.5 billion views. Social Blade puts his annual income at a minimum of €510,000. The maximum is a multiple of that sum. If these figures are to be believed, most of us would appear to be in the wrong line of work.

    It's short, but not a passing mention, and the contents indicate the notability of the subject. --Sammy1339 (talk) 16:39, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:57, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete - Sources above don't establish notability per the reasons stated by Sergecross73, I can't find any evidence of notability so will have to go with Delete. –Davey2010Talk 21:49, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep Per sources such as [146] [147] [148] [149]. In particular, the Sunday Times source says he runs Ireland's most popular YouTube channel, which seems notable. Everymorning talk 22:06, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:51, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 15 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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 merge to OMGPop#Games. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  17:51, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

List of games on OMGPop[edit]

List of games on OMGPop (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "List of games on OMGPop" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Non-notable list of game for now-defunct website - only one entry has an article (and none others are likely to warrant one) and no sources are likely to become available given its closure. Nikthestunned 09:55, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Merge OMGPop#Games Not sure why it was spun out and not going to find out in the 4 years of history, but evidently not large enough nor separately notable enough to warrant such a split. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 11:57, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 11:57, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I imagine its because so many other platforms have lists spun out like this, like PlayStation 4 and List of PlayStation 4 games. Of course, upon looking at these articles and comparing them to the respective OMGPop articles, its obvious to see they are both far smaller, and don't need to be split out at all. Sergecross73 msg me 12:35, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:44, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:44, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 12 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. Davewild (talk) 17:22, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Weird Science (game development studio)[edit]

Weird Science (game development studio) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Weird Science (game development studio)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Not enougn coverage in reliable sources to verify or sustian article. Fails WP:GNG and WP:CORP. Coverage seems to focus on the app, which has an article, rather than the company. Notability is not inherited. JbhTalk 14:16, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 19:48, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:48, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:49, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:49, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete. App doesn't have an article—the link's about its namesake. The game dev, as a subject, lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. (?) It had no meaningful hits in a video game reliable sources custom Google search. There are no worthwhile redirect targets. Please ping me you find more (non-English and offline) sources. – czar 20:48, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Question: does the app really have its own article? Because the wikilink in article-space goes to an article with the same name on an unrelated topic. CorporateM (Talk) 00:05, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
    @CorporateM: no the app does not have an article. The sources being used as refs in the article talk about the app rather than the makers though. I suppose an article on the app could be written assuming the notability standards for video games are low enough. JbhTalk 00:35, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete the current article; no objection to someone creating an article on the app. CorporateM (Talk) 00:38, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete not notable. Perhaps written for promotion as it's the only edit of its author.  sami  talk 12:56, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 11 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. Davewild (talk) 18:42, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

LYFE (video game)[edit]

LYFE (video game) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "LYFE (video game)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

This unreleased video game fails GNG. WP:TOOSOON. Sammy1339 (talk) 18:42, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 18:08, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:09, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 10 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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 Final Fantasy VII. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 00:12, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Shinra Electric Power Company[edit]

Shinra Electric Power Company (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Shinra Electric Power Company" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Notability not established. Largely in-universe description of a plot item in a video game, with references to books published by the game's publisher, an FAQ that doesn't discuss the topic in any detail and a self-published translation of part of one of the aforementioned books (dead link; try web.archive.org). QVVERTYVS (hm?) 13:16, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. North America1000 19:46, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) North America1000 19:46, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. North America1000 19:48, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Redirect - Certainly a large part of the Final Fantasy series, but I don't think it really has any out-of-universe relevance though. Even if it did, it'd almost be a WP:TNT type situation - I mean its really pretty far away from what we want Wikipedia articles to look like. (For example, What's up up with all of the block quotes/"c quotes" that are fictional direct quotes from what the character says in-game. It looks like something out of a game manual or something.) (EDIT: I'm fine with a redirect, it is a plausible search term. A merge wouldn't be necessary though, as most of the content isn't usable, and Final Fantasy 7 is in great shape, so it probably has all it needs about Shinra there already.) Sergecross73 msg me 12:26, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Final Fantasy VII. Exactly—no out-of-universe significance in a video game reliable sources custom Google search. The main article is sourced and handles the relevant material just fine. Please ping me you find more (non-English and offline) sources. – czar 23:06, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Move as suggested - My searches found nothing to suggest this has outstanding notability for a separate article. SwisterTwister talk 04:05, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Redirect - way, way too much in-universe detail; none of the information is usable in the article on the game as is. --PresN 18:44, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 8 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 23:45, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Brogue (video game)[edit]

Brogue (video game) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Brogue (video game)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Previous PROD, reason for removal being "This game received very good reviews from the gaming media and has a very dedicated fanbase. How is it of no importance?". I personally can't find anything that makes this article pass WP:GNG. --Anarchyte 00:04, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Keep - At least two existing sources in the article, plus a few others with a goggle search [150], [151], [152]. It's probably not going have a typical AAA game article structure but does appear notable. --MASEM (t) 00:14, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep - - per sources on talk page. Extremely lazy nomination. Please brush up on deletion policy, especially WP:BEFORE. A simple search could have found you the sources necessary to meet the WP:GNG. Sergecross73 msg me 00:22, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
    • The nominator explicitly stated that he/she at least tried to look for sources - that means that WP:BEFORE was done, and patrollers don't usually search the talk page for sources. Searching this game up with a few different keywords doesn't come with clear cut results. An nominator making an inaccurate nomination doesn't mean that the nominator is clueless on the deletion policy and notability guidelines, nor does it deserve blunt criticism. Esquivalience t 01:40, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
      • Esquivalience - The sources I'm talking about are available on the articles very short talk page, and a few are even in the article itself. If they didn't bother to check in places as obvious as this, I don't think they did a very good job following through on BEFORE. Also, at least one of the sources shows up on the most basic of searches - merely typing the name in at Google. This is found, and reliable per WP:VG/S. Sergecross73 msg me 03:11, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak keep. Article topic has several hits in a video game reliable sources custom Google search. (@Anarchyte, as a WPVG regular, it would be useful to search that custom Google site before listing a video game at AfD.) The Rock, Paper, Shotgun, PC Gamer, and indiegames.com articles are from vetted sources should be just sufficient for the general notability guideline, and then there's also Masem's links above. It isn't a lot—I would like to see more reviews, in particular—but there's more than passing mentions and enough to write an article. – czar 14:54, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:02, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 7 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:26, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Retro VGS[edit]

Retro VGS (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Retro VGS" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

advertising The Banner talk 23:03, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 14:49, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:49, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:49, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment - I had stumbled across this article in the past, and was also unhappy about it. But, it does seem to have the sources necessary to meet the WP:GNG. Does it need pretty much a complete rewrite, so it doesn't sounds like an "About the Project" type description from a Kickstarter page? Definitely. But I don't know about deletion... Sergecross73 msg me 15:26, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure I used reliable sources, and IGN also has an article on it (though admittedly it says nothing we haven't already seen on other websites), so I'd say it's pretty notable. Also, I apologize if it seems like I was advertising. I'm really not. I have absolutely nothing to do with the project, I just thought it was a very interesting idea, so I created this page. Logan The Master (talk) 5:18, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Keep as it meets notability standards as well as GNG. --wL<speak·check> 22:13, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep. The time spent on this AfD would be better spent cleaning up the article. Yes, it should be sourced to secondary sources wherever possible instead of the press release, however there are a number of sources for the purposes of the general notability guideline, including the TechCrunch refs currently in the article and the first few hits of the video game vetted sources custom Google search. "Advertising" is not a good deletion rationale—otherwise it would qualify for speedy deletion. – czar 03:45, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
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. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:26, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Far Horizon (video game)[edit]

Far Horizon (video game) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Far Horizon (video game)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Unreleased video game that does not seem to meet the notability criteria; no sources given to indicate notability or significance 331dot (talk) 15:38, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 14:20, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:21, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete. Article topic lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. (?) It had no meaningful hits in a video game reliable sources custom Google search. There are no worthwhile redirect targets as the dev also lacks coverage. Please ping me you find more (non-English and offline) sources. – czar 14:26, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete Fails WP:GNG. Can't find any reliable sources. The1337gamer (talk) 14:28, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete - Not a notable game. AdrianGamer (talk) 14:39, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete. No coverage in reliable sources. Studio seems to exist, but no news source has reported on them or their project. I don't even see a press release anywhere. It looks like it's way too soon for an article. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:41, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete and possible speedy delete per A7 or G11. No claim to any significance, likely some sort of advertising. Pretty clearly non-notable. mikeman67 (talk) 21:41, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete - appears to lack significance and reliable sources. Fails WP:GNG. Perhaps it will meet the criteria when released, but I could be misleading myself with that assumption - WP:TOOSOON. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 22:00, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 6 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. Sam Walton (talk) 09:35, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Big Pharma (game)[edit]

Big Pharma (game) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Big Pharma (game)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

I couldn't establish that this meets WP:NOTABILITY. Boleyn (talk) 06:13, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Delete - fails GNG МандичкаYO 😜 06:21, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete: Not an article. Advertising. Not notable. Hithladaeus (talk) 14:19, 6 June 2015 (UTC) Changing to weak delete on grounds of notability. Hithladaeus (talk) 01:33, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
    • Comment: The article we read today is much different from the one nominated for deletion. In particular, the most offensive violations of policy are gone. Although the debate has turned up sources, I'm having trouble. People say that AfD isn't clean up, but it is articles for deletion, not "concepts" for deletion, and if people argue to keep an article because the concept is valid, they're arguing fallaciously, in my opinion. There still aren't iRS of notability given in the article. Hithladaeus (talk) 01:33, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 16:47, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:47, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete - Unfortunately, I think I'm leaning more towards delete for now and maybe draft to userspace as my searches only found this (News links) and this (some reviews from Rock Paper Shotgun and PCGamer). It's gotten some coverage but nothing significant. SwisterTwister talk 21:21, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete, although it'll probably be remade when it's more notable. --Anarchyte 06:20, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep - I don't think notability is an issue for this game anymore. There are serval big Youtube Channels such as NerdCubed, Sips, Northernlion, and EnterElysium had done videos for this game, and had got considerable amounts of views on them.Kdmjf12000 (talk) 01:35, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
Those YouTube channels are all examples of self-published sources which in general fail Wikipedia's criteria for reliablity, so they can't be used to establish notability. The1337gamer (talk) 19:48, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
There is significant coverage from reliable, independent sources (?) and more than enough material with which to write an article. @Boleyn, Wikimandia, Hithladaeus, SwisterTwister, Anarchyte, Kdmjf12000, and The1337gamer – czar 19:28, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep per Czar. Another useful source also: [153] --The1337gamer (talk) 19:45, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep There is sufficient coverage identified above to establish notability per the main notability guideline. Davewild (talk) 07:23, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 5 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. – czar 19:18, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

The App Guruz[edit]

The App Guruz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "The App Guruz" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Non-notable company, has produced a fair number of apps but doesn't meet WP:GNG Primefac (talk) 11:47, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 14:37, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:37, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:37, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:37, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete. There is no indication that the subject meets the requirements of WP:GNG and WP:NCOMP. The article itself just cites primary sources. While performing my own search, I discovered nothing but a few brief mentions from sources that were either not independent or reliable. --Biblioworm 23:53, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete article does not indicate why they are notable, "sources" are the subject's own website, web searches turn up sales outlets, news and books yield nothing. Kraxler (talk) 17:56, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 4 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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 and redirect to Endless Ages. – czar 09:23, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Aaron Boucher[edit]

Aaron Boucher (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Aaron Boucher" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Article about a game designer that, aside from the inappropriate promotional narrative and unsourced material, seems to fail WP:BIO thoroughly. Alternatively a redirect to Endless Ages might be called for, with a minor bio blurb there with whatever can actually be sourced. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 17:12, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 18:15, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:15, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:15, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete - thoroughly promotional, with no evidence of significant, in-depth, third-party coverage. Neutralitytalk 23:30, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete - per nomination. 203.45.10.187 (talk) 06:15, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Move to Endless Ages as it seems he's known for creating that, as for notability, my searches found nothing significant to suggest independent notability. SwisterTwister talk 17:37, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
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. North America1000 08:13, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Impressive Title[edit]

Impressive Title (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Impressive Title" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Procedural nomination, article was PRODded by The1337gamer (t c), but the article was already deleted once via PROD in 2010.

The1337gamer's concern was: "Fails WP:GNG. Lacks significant coverage from reliable sources." —Darkwind (talk) 08:07, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) The1337gamer (talk) 09:17, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:58, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete - I agree that it fails the WP:GNG. It seems like nothing more than a fan's documentation of non-notable minutiae about the game's history. Non-notable fangame. If someone finds sources, like the ones documented at WP:VG/S, I'd be willing to reconsider though - there could be some hidden out there behind all the false-positives that would come up with searching for such a generic name. Sergecross73 msg me 19:23, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete WP:Notability (video games) --Anarchyte 00:44, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
@Anarchyte, just pointing to a policy without an explanation of reasoning is a deletion argument to avoid. – czar 15:22, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
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. North America1000 08:12, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

SpaceBall (game)[edit]

SpaceBall (game) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "SpaceBall (game)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

No indication of importance, WP:GNG, WP:Notability (video games). There's no references and I can't seem to find any. --Anarchyte 08:01, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:36, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete or redirect to the cell phone the game came with: Because this was a pre-loaded game, it will have an amazing amount of exposure, and there probably is documentation on its approval and selection. That doesn't mean that it is independently notable as a video game, though. Hithladaeus (talk) 18:01, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete - article makes no claim to any notability at all, no sources on page. mikeman67 (talk) 20:53, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete - Unfortunately, there probably isn't even anything to support a small merge to the phone article as my searches only found one minor mention. SwisterTwister talk 20:27, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete. No hits in a video game reliable sources custom Google search. Please ping me you find more (non-English and offline) sources. There are no worthwhile redirect targets unless a source mentions its relation to a specific model of phone. Article topic lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. (?) – czar 15:25, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 3 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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--Ymblanter (talk) 06:46, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Henry (virtual reality experience)[edit]

Henry (virtual reality experience) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Henry (virtual reality experience)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

DePRODed by creator without any attempt to address the issue(s). Concern was: No reliable 3rd party sources. No indication of importance. Promotional. Article fails WP:GNG and is possibly a candidate for speedy deletion WP:A7 and WP:G11. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:34, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 14:53, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:53, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Davewild (talk) 06:53, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete: It doesn't exist yet. This is TOOSOON and all that, because the article exists on the basis of a rumor of a project based on a hint. It can't be verified or be notable until it -- you know -- exists. Hithladaeus (talk) 18:21, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete for now (and maybe draft to userspace) - There's nothing solid yet and although my searches found several links here and here, there's not much yet. SwisterTwister talk 00:16, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
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 Bigpoint_Games#List_of_games_developed_by_Bigpoint . (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 00:12, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

SpaceInvasion[edit]

SpaceInvasion (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "SpaceInvasion" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Fails WP:GNG. Lacks significant coverage from reliable sources. The1337gamer (talk) 23:22, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) The1337gamer (talk) 23:27, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom --Anarchyte 00:20, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
@Editorofthewiki: Both of these sources appear to be completely unrelated to article and game in question. Maybe you should familiarise yourself with the topic first. --The1337gamer (talk) 16:51, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Yep, those links are not about this game. – czar 15:30, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
And in any case, a college student project page would not typically be sufficient sourcing to establish notability.Dialectric (talk) 18:24, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:26, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:26, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
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. Sam Walton (talk) 00:10, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Scott Cawthon[edit]

Scott Cawthon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Scott Cawthon" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Author contested PROD but concern still seems noticeable. Notable only for FNAF games - WP:BLP1E TL22 (talk) 01:04, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Same concern as the nom I had when I came across this at WP:VG/R, and I will give the same suggestion here: Redirect Five Nights at Freddy's (series) unless he develops any new notable games that is significantly outside the FNAF series. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 03:24, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 03:24, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep - "Notable only for FNAF games" doesn't come off as a valid reason for deleting his article, imo. Besides, there are some reliable sources for the articles. TouchArcade, IGN, Kotaku bear some fruit on some information to add onto the page. GamerPro64 03:47, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep - Nominators reasoning isn't a valid reason for deletion, he's notable per those games. --Anarchyte 09:29, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:44, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:44, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete - If he's only notable for one game franchise, which in itself is not universally-known, he is not notable enough to have a Wikipedia page about him. If we keep this, we might as well make pages for the dev of SCP - Containment Breach, and Slender: The Eight Pages, and every other slightly-popular indie game out there. Killerwhale24680 (talk) 21:49, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep - His significance is sufficient for an article on Wikipedia. Look at Kevin MacLeod. I guess their significance are similar. --Fazbear7891 (talk) 22:33, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
    But not because of that we're going to keep this article. WP:WHATABOUTX --TL22 (talk) 22:46, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep - If he were only here for the FNAF games, it would be a weak keep, but finding out that he's also involved with Hope Animations changes it to a flat-out keep from me. FNAF may be his most popularly-known project, but it's certainly not the only thing he's done - Noah's Ark was in development in 2005, as an example. I will say that the article could use a lot more detail about non-FNAF things, though. And a lot more refs, but then again, what article couldn't? NekoKatsun (talk) 15:53, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
    • Now that I think about it, you're right. I don't think the article really needs to be deleted, but we need more info on stuff that Cawthon has done aside from FNAF. If that were to happen, I think the article would be much better. Killerwhale24680 (talk) 19:01, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
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.

June 1 (AfD, CfD, TfD, MfD)

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. --MelanieN (talk) 21:28, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Football Manager 2016[edit]

Football Manager 2016 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Football Manager 2016" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

Possible future product fails WP:CRYSTAL as it's entirely based upon a job posting for the project. Per WP:CRYSTAL, "short articles that consist only of product announcement information are not appropriate" and this isn't even an announcement. --Non-Dropframe talk 22:13, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Delete. I certainly expect that this article will be made at some time in the future, but there's no reason for it to exist in its current state. Clearly falls under WP:CRYSTAL. This type of content seems best suited to game-related message boards. Bordwall(talkctrb) 23:57, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerly HMSSolent)|lambast 00:09, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete WP:CRYSTAL and WP:TOOSOON. It will be notable, but not right now. Also, it hasn't actually been confirmed as happening, the name could change (they used to be called "Championship Manager" after all). Joseph2302 (talk) 14:55, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 18:22, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:22, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete – It has all been said above. WP:CRYSTAL and WP:TOOSOON. Perhaps we should look at the other creations from this unexperienced user also. Qed237 (talk) 19:47, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
  • DeleteWP:TOOSOON --Anarchyte 09:52, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete - As others have said, WP:TOOSOON and WP:CRYSTAL. RegistryKey(RegEdit) 06:40, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete As detailed above, WP:CRYSTAL applies here. The article should be deleted and may be recreated upon release of the product when it meets WP:Notability guidelines. — Jordan Mussi Talk 15:21, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete WP:TOOSOON RoadWarrior445 (talk) 06:19, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete - Had there been alot more content and sources I'd of probably !voted Keep but a one liner with one source doesn't cut it, Seems more logical to delete and just recreate once there's more known about it. –Davey2010Talk 00:58, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete. I found a couple of sources that mention requested features for the game (realism & "demands") but these don't really support content in a Wikipedia article. There isn't enough (yet) to prove notability. Axl ¤ [Talk] 09:50, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
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. --MelanieN (talk) 21:32, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Turtle punch[edit]

Turtle punch (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Turtle punch" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR)

This is a free browser game. None of the sources are independent of the developer, and I can't find anything on Google but press releases. A WP:VG/RS Google custom search comes up similarly empty. It looks like this article was created too soon, as I don't see any evidence that it satisfies our inclusion criteria. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:09, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 16:55, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:56, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:56, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete per the nominators reasoning. --Anarchyte 09:33, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete - Unfortunately, this has not received any independent coverage at all and I found nothing despite multiple searches. SwisterTwister talk 05:54, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
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.
  1. ^ https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.NotGames.NotGTAV