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.
Contested PROD with a claim for new sources. Non-notable video games/series. I cannot locate multiple reliable independent in-depth sources for
WP:GNG, such as
WP:VG/RS. Does not appear that the coverage has changed since
last AfD. No meaningful hits in
custom RS search. The only new source that is probably RS is
Discovery Education, but it's only a single one. All the other sources in the article are unreliable or not in-depth. Lots of search hits otherwise, but none appear in-depth, mostly directory entries and generic descriptions. —
HELLKNOWZ ▎
TALK14:26, 20 February 2016 (UTC)reply
I doubt they are, but, even if they are, the content is not in-depth. That's one of the three requirements -- for there to be significant content on the topic. NPC is barely a paragraph with only a generic description. MoP is brief generic description and mostly not about the game(s). DE at least has significant content and critical reception in the form of a review, although doesn't state who the author is nor can I find any editorial information, though
[1] probably implies they have decent standards. —
HELLKNOWZ ▎
TALK21:44, 20 February 2016 (UTC)reply
I don't think it means much at all when the accompanying review is hardly a paragraph of PR information. They have not listed a single critical thing about the game. Perhaps they did have something more comprehensive internally, but we cannot
verify this without any published material. —
HELLKNOWZ ▎
TALK22:00, 22 February 2016 (UTC)\reply
Plus even if a single source is about the game, it doesn't make the game itself notable. There are a lot of hidden gems out there, though I don't think this is one. --
Kiyoshiendo (
talk)
23:00, 22 February 2016 (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.