The result was delete. TheIceking argued some sources were reliable, but later consensus specifically rejected this. Dcoetzee 06:27, 6 December 2011 (UTC) reply
This page was multiple created (see log1 and log2) and sadly it was accepted in the WP:AFC reviewing process last week. The problem is again that all sources are either primary sources or unreliable sources (e.g. best-strategygamesonline.com). mabdul 12:37, 21 November 2011 (UTC) reply
- Primary sources are used strictly to corroborate updated content in the article. It is quite impossible for a third party publication to supply updated information on the current game version or number of players. However, if this is a major issue I can simply remove said information and related sources from the article altogether.
- Contains at least two independent, credible sources of information regarding the article (onrpg and microsoft). games.blog.com has blog on the name, true, but it contains 5 editors and is directly associated with the official AOL games pages. So it's not a "one man and his blog" operation.
- Other articles on games with equivalent characteristics and notability are already presente in wikipedia, for example ([urban dead]).
- Is relevant/present in 6 other wikipedia lists.
TheIceking (
talk)
17:40, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
reply
TheIceking ( talk) 23:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC) reply