273:: "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article." Existence doesn't matter. "Groundbreaking" doesn't matter. All that really matters is that there's enough sources to write a half-decent article. Given that, our threshold is probably lower than you were expecting; we still keep stuff like
246:
My only real objection to what I've found about the game is that, if you go strictly on coverage, ones like Duke Nukem
Forever have had exponentially more coverage, and still don't even exist. And there's nothing that I've found to particularly say
358:
The article appears like an advertisement but it does not violate the crystal policy. So what if it is cancelled it has got lot of source to back up and plus it far from being cancelled. This afd should be immediately closed and withdraw.
220:
Google News has 364 articles about this game listed within the last week; there are contests and other activities surrounding its pre-launch already up. I'd have to say that there's definitely enough in terms of
321:, sources in the article (GI, Gamespot, Brian Crecente) establish notability. That doesn't stop the article from sucking, though, so I'll probably take a chainsaw to the poorly-written gameplay section shortly.
190:
and is speculating about a game that may or may not be released. In addition, in reading the article, it appears more like an advertisement than an encyclopediac description of the game and why it is notable.
154:
251:
game is groundbreaking and notable outside of just existing. And is that really how low our video game criteria should be? I'm not arguing one way or another, I'm just asking... how low
115:
148:
300:
17:
88:
83:
169:
92:
383:
36:
136:
75:
382:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
130:
126:
274:
368:
348:
330:
312:
286:
264:
241:
226:
214:
187:
57:
364:
260:
210:
196:
162:
53:
237:
176:
308:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
344:
326:
282:
222:
360:
256:
206:
192:
142:
79:
49:
270:
233:
304:
109:
340:
322:
278:
202:
71:
63:
229:
would apply if there wasn't that kind of major buzz surrounding it.
376:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
336:
105:
101:
97:
161:
175:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
386:). No further edits should be made to this page.
301:list of video game related deletion discussions
8:
255:our threshold for notability for games? --
299:: This debate has been included in the
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
225:to assert notability on this one.
24:
199:) 18:43, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
186:The article is in violation of
369:07:47, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
349:21:27, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
331:21:15, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
313:20:34, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
287:04:43, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
265:01:50, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
242:20:33, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
215:11:26, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
58:13:17, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
1:
403:
201:Nomination withdrawn per
379:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
48:. Non-admin closure. --
275:Project H.A.M.M.E.R.
271:Notability guideline
46:Nomination withdrawn
335:Chainsaw has been
315:
240:
394:
381:
337:taken to article
295:
236:
223:reliable sources
180:
179:
165:
113:
95:
44:The result was
34:
402:
401:
397:
396:
395:
393:
392:
391:
390:
384:deletion review
377:
122:
86:
70:
67:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
400:
398:
389:
388:
372:
371:
353:
352:
351:
316:
293:
292:
291:
290:
289:
183:
182:
119:
66:
61:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
399:
387:
385:
380:
374:
373:
370:
366:
362:
357:
354:
350:
346:
342:
338:
334:
333:
332:
328:
324:
320:
317:
314:
310:
306:
302:
298:
294:
288:
284:
280:
276:
272:
268:
267:
266:
262:
258:
254:
250:
245:
244:
243:
239:
235:
232:
228:
224:
219:
218:
217:
216:
212:
208:
205:reasoning. --
204:
200:
198:
194:
189:
178:
174:
171:
168:
164:
160:
156:
153:
150:
147:
144:
141:
138:
135:
132:
128:
125:
124:Find sources:
120:
117:
111:
107:
103:
99:
94:
90:
85:
81:
77:
73:
69:
68:
65:
62:
60:
59:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
378:
375:
355:
318:
296:
252:
248:
230:
185:
184:
172:
166:
158:
151:
145:
139:
133:
123:
45:
43:
31:
28:
356:Strong Keep
339:. Discuss.
149:free images
269:Quoth our
227:WP:CRYSTAL
188:WP:CRYSTAL
361:SkyWalker
257:Lithorien
207:Lithorien
193:Lithorien
72:Bayonetta
64:Bayonetta
50:SkyWalker
277:around.
234:Tony Fox
203:Nifboy's
116:View log
305:MrKIA11
155:WP refs
143:scholar
89:protect
84:history
341:Nifboy
323:Nifboy
279:Nifboy
238:(arf!)
127:Google
93:delete
170:JSTOR
131:books
110:views
102:watch
98:links
16:<
365:talk
345:talk
327:talk
319:Keep
309:talk
297:Note
283:talk
261:talk
249:this
231:Keep
211:talk
197:talk
163:FENS
137:news
106:logs
80:talk
76:edit
54:talk
177:TWL
114:– (
367:)
359:--
347:)
329:)
311:)
303:.
285:)
263:)
253:is
213:)
157:)
108:|
104:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
82:|
78:|
56:)
363:(
343:(
325:(
307:(
281:(
259:(
209:(
195:(
181:)
173:·
167:·
159:·
152:·
146:·
140:·
134:·
129:(
121:(
118:)
112:)
74:(
52:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.