Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dark orbit

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. One two three... 04:00, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dark orbit[edit]

Article has been tagged for speedy, which an editor converted to a prod which was contested without comment. No initiative has been shown to improve the article. I have been unable to find reliable sources to verify notability - 1,000,000 Ghits for "Dark Orbit", most of cheat sites and youtube videos. When unencyclopedic content is removed, not much is left. —LedgendGamer 23:42, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - notability not established wrt WP:RS. Eddie.willers (talk) 00:47, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral. The article is dreadful, but the game does seem to have some coverage on Google News. I've not got the energy to check if the sources are reliable, and many are not in English, but don't delete it without looking through those sources first! Fences and windows (talk) 01:38, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Frustratingly the English language hits are just press releases. If I were to pick out a handful of the most promising sources for translation, I'd go for [1] and [2] - they are sizable, mention the game several times and look reliable. Marasmusine (talk) 13:51, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 12:47, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete because I cannot find anything notable using this unashamed search engine test as well as WP:SBST at least because the article is unable to establish self-notability. However, I recognize that this could change and would frown if this afd was referenced in a future debate over a revived Dark orbit. Z a bM i l e n k o 17:41, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete and borderline speedy deletion per either A7 (open to interpretation) or G11. Borderline advertisement, and definitely nothing that can establish notability here. MuZemike 18:17, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Its subscriber base (1 million) is impressive and is, in my opinion, sufficient to establish self-importance under A7. Your claim for G11 also seems weak. Nanowolf (talk) 00:20, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tentative keep The game may be somewhat notable due to its "real money"-to-"game money" scheme, which is referenced here (translated automatically from Google, so please bear with it). Nanowolf (talk) 00:20, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MacMed (talk) 03:25, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Insufficient evidence of notability via reliable sources. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 15:27, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This game has over a million subscribers so it should not be deleted because i know of people who have used wikipedia to try and find resources on the game. If you want to, feel free to edit it and post pictures you can do so. 23:04, 24 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Timeforthelolz (talk • contribs)

Frankly, it's probably too late for such people to come and edit the article now; this AfD has been relisted once already, and is getting pretty close to closure. It might be a better idea to userfy and work on it for now. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 23:41, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'm throwing in a last-minute weak keep. As I linked to above, I feel that some of the non-english hits on Google News are suitable for the general notability guideline (see also WP:BIAS) Marasmusine (talk) 22:06, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- You don't happen to be able to read German or Polish, do you? The fact that they're foreign-language is always going to be a problem in terms of verifiability. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 00:38, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question It says on their site "Play now and compete against thousands of real players" and I see 48000 people online right now. Where is the claim that they have 18 million registered users? Any reliable way to gauge their net traffic? Alexa is too faulty, as many have proven in the past. Dream Focus 03:49, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.