692:. Article should have reviews used as a references, not promotion. Remove the art and style bits, they are biased. Source the developments parts or do not use them. Article is salvageable, but needs work. Might want to fix that image as well. Also as to the previous comments about notable content most of those sites are relevant tech blogs. Gear Diary has an Editor, the app scout is ZD blog, and the-gadgeteer gets talked about on many tech blogs, like shinny shinny. Fix these issues read it a loud a few times, you will see what is up. I hope that helps.
807:– As noted in the article and above, there looks like a couple of sources that are reliable (at least, from doing a quick spot check, two of them have editorial staffs that should provide some reputation for fact-checking and accuracy) and hence can establish some notability. While the tone of the article can improve to be more encyclopedic, I don't think it's that promotional at all to warrant deletion. That can easily be cleaned up to fix that.
818:
Well, having an editorial staff doesn't necessarily warrant reliability of sources. It's important to analyze the staff, and make the decision whether they are trustworthy and experienced enough to provide reliability in information. I don't believe that staff has the credentials to be treated as
766:
I "Dani Zee" am one of developers, which I have admitted to the admins. In fact I have been waiting for this article to organically be written. Once I saw it was, I edited (which I have stopped doing) for the the sake of providing accuracy and references. I will not edit the article anymore but I
235:
No, I don't think he's toying with us. Seems like he's having trouble with the
Mediawiki software. Obvious first-time user. This is actually a comment I moved to its proper position. Originally, it was at the top of this page, which made it appear, to someone looking at the log, that it had to do
457:
If you'll read the discussion going on here, you'll see that simply putting random review links in the article doesn't make it okay to keep. All sources used must be reliable. So far, I've only see one reliable source used, and it's just not enough to warrant an entire article.
408:
I just started editing it, and added the review sources to the reference page when I noticed this discussion was going on. The person who put this article up for deletion did not allowed enough time for the community of proactive users to add to this article.
859:- of the references provided, I'm dismissing them all as self-published sources except for App Scout. However, this remaining source is not exactly significant coverage. Perhaps enough to verify the game in a "list of iPhone games" article.
770:
Twitter is not evidence of association. Ericmaas has is not an employee or contractor of
Ayumusoft. My name (Dani) is not even spelled right on the tweet. Ericmaas is following hExistentialim but hExistentialim is not following Ericmaas.
341:
How are they not reliable, they verify that the game exists, and they discuss the game. how is that not a good source? Please answer in a clear complete manner otherwise I am stuck spinning in cirlces.
473:
767:
will make a case for this article to stay up on wikipedia. You can decide whether or not to take my statements into account when making the decision keep the article on wikipedia.
122:
567:
630:
474:
http://www.google.com/search?q=gadgeteer+hExistentialism&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=gCy&start=10&sa=N
371:
I'm not quite sure what that link is for, however I will retract my statement that NONE of those are reliable sources, as AppScout seems to be a part of
237:
719:. The key is that being "talked about on many tech blogs" does not qualify for reliability. It's just not what the standards for Knowledge (XXG) are.
540:
There is no editorial oversight there. Your presented standards for reliability don't seem to match with
Knowledge (XXG)'s standards for reliability.
505:
676:
751:
89:
84:
448:
699:
93:
17:
379:. Unfortunately, one mention in a reliable source still doesn't seem to warrant an article. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here.
76:
787:
523:
491:
444:
425:
198:
167:
324:
259:
Unfortunately, I think this process is being severely complicated by that as well. Oh well, whatever has to be done...
883:
36:
305:
48:. Aside from the weak keep by mike, the other two intial keeps did not hold up to the scrutiny of the eight deletes
506:
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=link:www.the-gadgeteer.com&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
366:
286:
This game is non-notable as far as I can tell. I can't find any reliable sources for coverage and verifiability.
882:
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
755:
535:
868:
851:
828:
811:
791:
759:
728:
707:
703:
681:
652:
639:
618:
593:
549:
527:
495:
467:
429:
388:
358:
336:
295:
268:
254:
230:
202:
171:
142:
58:
775:
695:
511:
479:
413:
186:
155:
824:
724:
614:
545:
463:
384:
354:
332:
291:
264:
226:
80:
864:
847:
670:
588:
310:
241:
72:
64:
151:
Game is noteable. Please allow time for corrects, and a better
Knowledge (XXG) staff explanation.
779:
743:
739:
515:
483:
436:
417:
218:
190:
159:
244:. I just had some trouble making him understand that, and I'm not sure he understands even now. --
808:
783:
519:
487:
440:
421:
194:
163:
182:
All seems good now. Please remove delete notice. Thanks for your help brah! Go with christ.
315:
820:
720:
610:
541:
459:
380:
350:
328:
287:
260:
222:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
665:
472:
A Simple google search shows the
Gadgeteer Article being picked up by various other websites
860:
843:
376:
634:
839:
716:
606:
346:
349:, and it should be apparent. If for some reason, it's still not, we can get into that.
649:
661:
602:
582:
110:
747:
306:
http://the-gadgeteer.com/2009/07/03/hexistentialism-iphoneipod-touch-game-review/
49:
367:
http://siteanalytics.compete.com/randomn3ss.com+appscout.com+the-gadgeteer.com/
372:
819:
such. The only legitimate source in my opinion still seems to be AppScout.
536:
http://www.geardiary.com/2009/06/10/quick-look-hexistentialism/#more-32632
648:. Not notable enough. Current article is unsalvageably biased anyway. •
576:
838:. This looks pretty non-notable. No significant coverage in multiple
534:
Here is a non-self published review. This site has 9 contributors.
311:
http://www.appscout.com/2009/06/hexistentialism_offers_mind-st.php
876:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
316:
http://www.randomn3ss.com/iphone-app-review-hexistentialism/
117:
106:
102:
98:
742:
is presumably Dani Zuniga, one of the developers, and
129:
Speedy tag removed by an IP. Non-notable video game.
363:
Lets get into it. I am still not seeing your point.
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
886:). No further edits should be made to this page.
631:list of video game related deletion discussions
502:All of these guys find the-gadgeteer relevant:
406:This Article should remain on Knowledge (XXG).
748:http://twitter.com/ericmaas/status/1886478495
8:
302:Here are notable reviews from notable sites:
562:
238:Instruction and Advice for the Young Bride
568:list of Game-related deletion discussions
842:'s. I don't like the COI aspect either.
629:: This debate has been included in the
566:: This debate has been included in the
746:is associated with the developers (see
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
217:Is that last comment a joke by
1:
738:. Article is self-promotion.
715:Please, please, please read
375:. The others appear to be
903:
869:10:52, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
852:04:27, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
829:21:40, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
812:02:22, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
792:03:13, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
760:03:05, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
729:06:29, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
708:01:03, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
682:21:10, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
653:16:50, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
640:08:56, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
619:05:46, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
594:03:36, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
550:02:57, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
528:02:39, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
496:02:30, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
468:02:25, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
430:02:22, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
389:02:18, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
359:02:04, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
337:01:59, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
296:01:44, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
269:02:01, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
255:01:57, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
231:01:51, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
203:01:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
172:01:06, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
143:01:03, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
59:08:54, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
879:Please do not modify it.
323:Sorry, but those aren't
320:This is verifiable yes?
32:Please do not modify it.
377:self-published sources
449:few or no other edits
149:Please do not delete.
451:outside this topic.
607:No reliable sources
44:The result was
795:
778:comment added by
698:comment added by
684:
642:
596:
592:
571:
531:
514:comment added by
499:
482:comment added by
452:
433:
416:comment added by
252:
206:
189:comment added by
175:
158:comment added by
140:
894:
881:
794:
772:
710:
680:
673:
671:Scheinwerfermann
625:
585:
579:
574:
572:
530:
508:
498:
476:
434:
432:
410:
373:Ziff Davis Media
325:reliable sources
251:
249:
205:
183:
174:
152:
139:
137:
120:
114:
96:
34:
902:
901:
897:
896:
895:
893:
892:
891:
890:
884:deletion review
877:
773:
693:
679:
669:
583:
577:
509:
477:
411:
245:
242:HExistentialism
184:
153:
133:
116:
87:
73:HExistentialism
71:
68:
65:HExistentialism
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
900:
898:
889:
888:
872:
871:
854:
832:
831:
815:
814:
797:
796:
768:
763:
762:
732:
731:
712:
711:
686:
685:
675:
655:
643:
623:
621:
597:
559:
558:
557:
556:
555:
554:
553:
552:
532:
503:
454:
453:
402:
401:
400:
399:
398:
397:
396:
395:
394:
393:
392:
391:
364:
318:
313:
308:
303:
299:
298:
280:
279:
278:
277:
276:
275:
274:
273:
272:
271:
210:
209:
208:
207:
177:
176:
127:
126:
67:
62:
56:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
899:
887:
885:
880:
874:
873:
870:
866:
862:
858:
855:
853:
849:
845:
841:
837:
834:
833:
830:
826:
822:
821:Brian Reading
817:
816:
813:
810:
806:
802:
799:
798:
793:
789:
785:
781:
777:
769:
765:
764:
761:
757:
753:
752:24.23.157.146
749:
745:
741:
737:
734:
733:
730:
726:
722:
721:Brian Reading
718:
714:
713:
709:
705:
701:
697:
691:
688:
687:
683:
678:
672:
667:
663:
659:
656:
654:
651:
647:
644:
641:
638:
637:
632:
628:
624:
622:
620:
616:
612:
608:
604:
601:
598:
595:
590:
586:
580:
569:
565:
561:
560:
551:
547:
543:
542:Brian Reading
539:
538:
537:
533:
529:
525:
521:
517:
513:
507:
504:
501:
500:
497:
493:
489:
485:
481:
475:
471:
470:
469:
465:
461:
460:Brian Reading
456:
455:
450:
446:
442:
438:
431:
427:
423:
419:
415:
407:
404:
403:
390:
386:
382:
381:Brian Reading
378:
374:
370:
369:
368:
365:
362:
361:
360:
356:
352:
351:Brian Reading
348:
344:
343:
340:
339:
338:
334:
330:
329:Brian Reading
326:
322:
321:
319:
317:
314:
312:
309:
307:
304:
301:
300:
297:
293:
289:
288:Brian Reading
285:
282:
281:
270:
266:
262:
261:Brian Reading
258:
257:
256:
248:
243:
239:
234:
233:
232:
228:
224:
223:Brian Reading
221:? Vandalism?
220:
216:
215:
214:
213:
212:
211:
204:
200:
196:
192:
188:
181:
180:
179:
178:
173:
169:
165:
161:
157:
150:
147:
146:
145:
144:
136:
132:
124:
119:
112:
108:
104:
100:
95:
91:
86:
82:
78:
74:
70:
69:
66:
63:
61:
60:
57:
55:
54:
50:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
878:
875:
856:
835:
804:
800:
735:
700:97.157.46.97
689:
657:
645:
635:
626:
605:video game.
599:
563:
405:
345:Please read
283:
246:
148:
134:
130:
128:
52:
51:
45:
43:
31:
28:
861:Marasmusine
857:Weak delete
844:Niteshift36
774:—Preceding
694:—Preceding
603:Non-notable
510:—Preceding
478:—Preceding
447:) has made
412:—Preceding
240:instead of
185:—Preceding
154:—Preceding
636:Greg Tyler
247:Blanchardb
135:Blanchardb
801:Weak keep
809:MuZemike
788:contribs
780:Dani zee
776:unsigned
744:Ericmaas
740:Dani zee
696:unsigned
660:. Fails
524:contribs
516:Ericmaas
512:unsigned
492:contribs
484:Dani zee
480:unsigned
445:contribs
437:Dani zee
426:contribs
418:Dani zee
414:unsigned
253:- timed
219:Ericmaas
199:contribs
191:Ericmaas
187:unsigned
168:contribs
160:Ericmaas
156:unsigned
141:- timed
123:View log
805:cleanup
666:WP:SOAP
284:Delete.
131:Delete.
90:protect
85:history
836:Delete
736:Delete
658:Delete
650:Anakin
646:Delete
611:Crafty
600:Delete
118:delete
94:delete
46:delete
840:WP:RS
717:WP:RS
587:)  ·
347:WP:RS
236:with
121:) – (
111:views
103:watch
99:links
16:<
865:talk
848:talk
825:talk
803:and
784:talk
756:talk
725:talk
704:talk
690:Edit
664:and
662:WP:N
627:Note
615:talk
589:@192
584:talk
564:Note
546:talk
520:talk
488:talk
464:talk
441:talk
422:talk
385:talk
355:talk
333:talk
292:talk
265:talk
227:talk
195:talk
164:talk
107:logs
81:talk
77:edit
750:).
668:. —
573:--
53:Nja
867:)
850:)
827:)
790:)
786:•
758:)
727:)
706:)
633:.
617:)
609:.
591:·
581:·
578:X!
570:.
548:)
526:)
522:•
494:)
490:•
466:)
443:•
435:—
428:)
424:•
387:)
357:)
335:)
327:.
294:)
267:)
229:)
201:)
197:•
170:)
166:•
109:|
105:|
101:|
97:|
92:|
88:|
83:|
79:|
863:(
846:(
823:(
782:(
754:(
723:(
702:(
677:C
674:·
613:(
575:(
544:(
518:(
486:(
462:(
439:(
420:(
383:(
353:(
331:(
290:(
263:(
250:-
225:(
193:(
162:(
138:-
125:)
115:(
113:)
75:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.