Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Video games

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Video games. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Video games|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Video games. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from August 2015) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Video games/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Video games-related deletions

Cossacks (video games series)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No clear evidence this is independently notable as a series or passes WP:GNG. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:19, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Cossacks: European Wars as an ATD. It's unnecessary that the games be lumped like this, but I think the first game in the series is a fine target. Conyo14 (talk) 00:21, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rat Race (video game)

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG; only notability is its announcement and subsequent cancellation, with sources being mainly on these two details. MimirIsSmart (talk) 12:52, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:20, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've added some sources. Timur9008 (talk) 17:07, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The sources do not convince me it has notability as a standalone article. There seem to be some mentioned links in the previous AfD, but they are permanently dead - oops. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:40, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per the consensus and sources found in the first AFD. Not sure how hard the above looked but they're easily found, and some cover things beyond the simple announcement and cancellation, like it's poor reception prior to its cancellation. ~~Only the MTV source appears to be dead, but it still existed at one point, and~~ I even found a few new sources, so there's enough present to write an article around.

There's enough to support an article here. Sergecross73 msg me 18:19, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The notability standard is much higher for cancelled games, but there is reliable sourcing as above and in the earlier AfD about the gameplay details, development, and even some early feedback from outlets that they weren't getting good vibes from the game. This deserves to be kept. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 21:55, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Sergecross73 did post sources here, but all are passing mentions or non-significant coverage, interviews (WP:PRIMARY) or routine announcements as regurgitated press releases. Really not convinced about the notability of this game at all. If we took this as meeting WP:GNG, then every upcoming/vaporware/cancelled video game ever would be notable and have its own article too. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 11:04, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to List of cancelled PlayStation 3 games as an alternative to deletion - The sources are short announcements, not SIGCOV. And one of them is an interview which counts as a primary source. --Mika1h (talk) 13:18, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I disagree with some of the assessments above. I've found the MTV source, which is neither routine nor short - its a pretty deep dive. MTV is an RS, and its written by Stephen Totillo, an experienced video game journalist. I also disagree that the coverage is simply routine - the Wired coverage talks about leaked footage, and the poor reception it got, which is anything but routine. And the rest - I don't agree with the label "passing mention" when they're articles entirely dedicated to the subject. Sergecross73 msg me 14:24, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  The MTV article is not "independent of the subject", the writer is recounting an interview and a press release. Regarding the other sources, I guess what constitutes "significant coverage" is subjective but these news announcements satisfy the "directly" part of GNG but not the "in detail" part. They are basically glorified press releases, they are reciting what Sony has told them. The Wired coverage: Yes, it has critical analysis but it's one paragraph, is that 50 words? No way that is "in detail". Again, SIGCOV is subjective but that is setting the bar really low. --Mika1h (talk) 15:14, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - No, that's not quite right, the MTV article is reporting on someone else's interview, and covers other things, like the game's leak on GameTrailers, its poor reception, etc. It's incorrect to try to handwave that away as some sort of interview/press release, its more nuanced than that. Sergecross73 msg me 15:57, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to List of cancelled PlayStation 3 games (though there isn't much to be added): Doing some in-depth search, MTV's coverage at [1] is decent, but that's where it all stops. Based on my comment above and seeing Mika1h's proposal, this is where I end up. There is simply not enough significant coverage of the game - cancelled projects can be extensively covered, even lesser known ones like Heist (video game). This just doesn't meet WP:GNG, but an alternative to deletion is always preferred. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 19:30, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Red Barrels

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. There seems to be no significant coverage. The focus of the sources are the Outlast games, not the company itself. Suggesting redirection to Outlast as an alternative to deletion. Mika1h (talk) 18:48, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Canada. Mika1h (talk) 18:48, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to its claim to fame (Outlast). --CNMall41 (talk) 20:15, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep there is clear coverage in at least two existing sources (edge and gi.biz) about the founding of the company that meet the independence of NCORP. That might be tied to talking about Outlast but that's expected for a developer that has focused on one series since founding. Masem (t) 21:20, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you referring to the edge article currently on the page?--CNMall41 (talk) 21:59, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that gi.biz is SIGCOV, but that Edge article (about Assassin's Creed) only has a passing mention to the company. --Mika1h (talk) 12:57, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I was wondering as the Edge article on the page is no where near meeting WP:ORGCRIT. The gi.biz is an industry publication so while it meets ORGCRIT, it is still not enough and not that strong of a reference to meet NCORP standards. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:15, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: It appears their sole product, the Outlast series, would be more notable. Could this be retooled into a series article? IgelRM (talk) 11:27, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Campaign Trail (Web Game)

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Low notability and lack of reliable or real sources per WP:GNG. Tadpole2006 (talk) 23:47, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:15, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, only a single RS cited for one sentence, the rest of the article cites the website itself or fan websites, obviously going against notability guidelines and WP:NOR. I'll also note that discussion about this article is taking place on the game's subreddit encouraging fans to edit this article, which has a danger of turning into WP:CANVASS. 148.252.145.173 (talk) 00:21, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Clearly not notable. λ NegativeMP1 00:30, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The Polygon source is the only one I can find about the game. One source isn't enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:45, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I looked for sources and found only the usual game/developer accounts, Fandom page, and some social media, but no reliable, secondary sources beside the single Polygon source. I also used the WikiProject Video games custom Google searches and found the same, plus many more about the board game with the same title, and general use of the phrase "[the] campaign trail". Woodroar (talk) 00:57, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete. Not notable per WP:GNG nor does one source make something notable enough for a page, per all the above. This is an encyclopedia, not a playground for 14 year old Redditor's who appear to be fanboys of George Wallace or Nelson Rockefeller to make a muck in. The subreddit post in question that the IP user above referred too makes this seem like an extra insidious attempt to violate WP:CANVASS. Wikipedia is not a toy. Planetberaure (talk) 01:13, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as soon as possible, genuinely really sorry for the way our community handled this. I admittedly tried to add some genuine information, and while I tried to utilize of WK:Canvas rules, admittedly did not know about WK:Notable rules and agree that the web game is most definetly, as of yet not known enough as of yet. I'm a moderator on it and if necessary could try to disavow the recommending of the editing on this article. 191.231.211.69 (talk) 01:53, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Deletearooski As an admittedly big fan of both the New Campaign Trail and the Campaign Trail Showcase, I am afraid that I'm going to have to go with the majority opinion here and advise a delete of this page. While there is one (1) notable and reliable source (Polygon), the rest of the sources that could be added would either be direct links to the website itself OR links to years old Reddit threads with no actual additional notability to be added to the context of the article. Also note the discussion currently going on in the Reddit thread (violating WP:CANVASS), and how despite my love for this game, it really only fosters a community of alternate history obsessed nerds who spend way too much time on an internet web game and who idolize long dead and, even in their time, has been politicians (George Romney, Scoop Jackson, and the aforementioned Wallace come to mind). Really niche? Yes. Really fun? Yep. Really deserving of a Wikipedia article? Nah. Cheers, atque supra! Fake scientist 8000 01:35, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete. Please do delete this. So sorry about this article-I'm from the game's community and we told people not to do crap like this and they still do. I am begging you for our sake please get rid of this it's not notable and it's just embarrassing people keep trying to make one because they want it to be a "real game." Not really sure if I'm breaking rules as I'm kinda connected to the game I guess (sorry I don't use wikipedia much I just have an account) but yeah it's obviously not notable. Crabpop83 (talk) 01:34, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This page was made by a fan account closely associated with the game's subreddit and there is literally a thread of them celebrating its creation as if it is a toy. [2] Also as mentioned above, this relies on primary sources and doesn't have much notability. Due to the potential violations of Wikipedia's policies and notability, this needs to go — Preceding unsigned comment added by AsaQuathern (talk • contribs) 01:32, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As is, the article isn't WP:Notable. The Polygon article simply isn't enough to warrant notability, and as Woodroar pointed out, there aren't any other sources that could be added to make it notable. ImperialSam27 (talk) 01:38, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete: Yep. Doesn't meet GNG. TheWikiToby (talk) 02:46, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lgndvykk Creator of the article page here, I have read all of your comments and I do infact see everyone's point. I would like to apologize to everyone for this. There is infact, as Woodroar stated, no notable articles that can be added to make it notable.Lgndvykk - User Talk 04:32, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to also add that my friend had canvassed the article not knowing it was against the rules. This was falsely also marked as a conflict of interest, as it was my friend who first pitched the idea. Again, I do apologize and wish that we resolve this as swift as possible. Lgndvykk (talk) 05:24, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Lgndvykk If this article definitively does not meet notability, do you, as the significant author of and biggest contributor to the article, agree to have it speedy deleted? If so, we can have it deleted as soon as possible rather than wait. TheWikiToby (talk) 06:14, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Their friend who made the reddit post now says they'll be "working with Wikipedia to get it deleted" FWIW. – Stuart98 ( Talk • Contribs) 07:43, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Politics, Websites, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:21, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: no reliable sources. @Planetberaure and Crabpop83: note that an article needs to satisfy one of the criteria in order to be speedily deleted. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 06:31, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My input to this page was written under the impression of this article as falling under WP:G11 and/or WP:A7 but as per the above this now is also a case of WP:G7 so the point is a bit moot. Planetberaure (talk) 12:08, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete, though I've dabbled in TCT it clearly lacks notability and the page's creator has admitted as much. Even if they haven't explicitly asked for it to be deleted, might as well WP:SNOWBALL it. – Stuart98 ( Talk • Contribs) 07:31, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:SNOW Delete, as completely failing WP:GNG Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 11:21, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect. This game looks like it's a derivative game of Campaign Trail: The Game of Presidential Elections, so it could be mentioned there. This derivative doesn't seem to qualify for a separate article (and we also don't need articles about HTTP 500 error sites). – By the way, this article does not qualify for speedy deletion, because none of the criteria for speedy deletion are met, not even G7 as far as I can see. Killarnee (talk) 11:32, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would think WP:A7 would be the applicable CSD here. Certainly when 2/3 of your "sources" are screenshots there seems to be some substantial failure to indicate why its subject is important or significant. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 11:47, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
G11 is for unambiguous advertisement, in other words, spam. Failing NPOV only, like here, is not a valid reason for G11. A7 is for articles where there is not even an indication of importance; however, that indication does not have to be based on references. In fact, there are many articles without any references that did not pass A7. There is a notable article about the original game and a community, so that it indeed is debatable. Killarnee (talk) 14:26, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect, The game is openly declared by the creator to be derivative of Campaign Trail: The Game of Presidential Elections, so possibly building there? It isn't quite at the criteria for speedy deletion, though deletion would be reasonable. Besides, as a contributor to the community, it honestly doesn't quite reach notability on its own, and overly drawing attention to the community is frankly last thing they need. ListMan38 (talk) 15:25, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is also mentioned in one sentence of the polygon article: The Campaign Trail began in 2012 as a simple, lo-fi browser game designed by Dan Bryan, inspired by a board game of the same name, so that is at least something that could be included there. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 15:52, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Although I should note that with only one sentence in one reliable source not even about the board game the multiple paragraphs currently being added to that article seem very WP:UNDUE Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 15:56, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Also a fan of the game but clearly fails GNG. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 18:48, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete One source does not notability make. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:08, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
notability make... TheWikiToby (talk) 20:13, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wiktionary:one swallow does not a summer make ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:53, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: there is not enough significant coverage to meet notibility standards. 1keyhole (talk) 12:45, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paper doll (video games)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. This is more of a thing for Glossary of video game terminology than its own article, IMO. Looking for SIGCOV, I only found articles about dress-up games, making it dubious whether this term even solely applies to this manner of character customization. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:52, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:52, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The term does not seem to be commonly used, based on Gbooks and Gsearch results. I can only see games where you actually put clothes on virtual dolls. Oaktree b (talk) 15:52, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is the first instance I've heard the term paper doll used in a video game setting, and I've not seen anything that shows this term in significant detail. It also doesn't help that there are games with similar titles to "Paper doll" in my searches. Conyo14 (talk) 23:58, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Glossary of video game terminology as WP:ATD-M: A single sentence def there should be enough. While the term is not very common, it looks like it is relatively established in this specific RPGish or technical meaning: many passing mentions in WP:VGRS, e.g. usage by devs talking about game design [3][4] and in patch notes [5], as well as in reviews [6]. It also appears on Google Books: [7] [8] [9], but as it's relatively limited to simple definitions and passing mentions, none of these establish enough WP:SIGCOV for a keep.

Redirect to Glossary of video game terminology. It's possible this some of this information could be duplicated at an article about video game inventories. Do we even have an article like that? It's a broad enough concept to consider for an article. Shooterwalker (talk) 19:33, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RPG inventories are mentioned in Item (game terminology). There are sections for other genres but not RPGs. --Mika1h (talk) 15:35, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TheoTown

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The page was deleted multiple times for A7 and G11 reasons, so I figure having a full deletion discussion might be worth it. The only sources given are primary: the game's website, and the Steam/App Store/Google Play pages and ratings. The only sources I could find were a self-published blog explicitly including affiliate links, and this review, whose website appears to have an editorial team but for which I'm not sure how reliable it is, as only one of the members is an accredited journalist. Still, assuming this counts as a RS, a single source isn't enough for WP:GNG. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:22, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:22, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Agree with what's explained above, there isn't much in the way of product reviews for this app. I don't find much else either. Oaktree b (talk) 19:54, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: per nom
Mithilanchalputra (Talk) 11:37, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete This is much more borderline - a search on my end found two RS reviews: one from TouchArcade [10] another from 148Apps [11] and a non-RS listicle from GamingEsports [12] and brief mention in Wireframe [13]. I would consider this to be notable if one more RS or solid review could be located. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 08:39, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot! Just curious, where did you do your WP:BEFORE? I only did a cursory search (first pages of Google and Google News), but I'm curious if there are better places to look for video game-related sources. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:28, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mix of Google search, Internet Archive, and WP:VG/SE. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 11:07, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That last link is great to have, thanks a lot! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 12:33, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Little information I have found that can demonstrate notability.--Bexaendos (talk) 16:37, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the article will be deleted since there will be no information about the game, I propose to publish more information. 2800:810:544:AF:8DC6:DFBF:DB1A:7522 (talk) 17:51, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean? You can ask sources to publish more information, although it might take longer than the time this AfD runs, but we can't add more information that sources haven't published. Although the sources provided above can definitely be added in the article, and are a good first step. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:26, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I will suggest moving it to the draft space, allowing the JJP to improve its sourcing and content as article seems not to be ready for mainspace. Nxcrypto Message 16:13, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep.This is a decent sized game with a decent audience. I play the game a lot and the discord server had over 10,000 members. BooCooE ^(talk) 17:13, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ILIKEIT λ NegativeMP1 20:18, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - There's a print review from Gameplay magazine: [14], when combined with TouchArcade's review: [15], that's 2 reliable reviews. And there's reviews from 148Apps and Softonic: [16]], [17], according to WP:VG/S, there are inconclusive discussions of their reliability, so until they are determined to be unreliable, I'm leaning keep on this one. --Mika1h (talk) 00:52, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for finding these sources! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 01:15, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is great work finding more sources! Caution that the Softonic review is nonattributed and its evaluative aspects are a pretty meaningless single word salad paragraph: "rich and engaging gameplay experience...challenging and rewarding experience...engaging and immersive." Comes off a bit WP:PROMO or gAI. If the Gameplay review is WP:SIGCOV this probably does enter the territory of keep, but it's WP:OFFLINE. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 07:00, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 21:39, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Old Grandma Hardcore

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No real establishment of notability. The sources provided are: a blog site, the MTV homepage, a BusinessWeek article about her gaming career which seemed quite trivial, and a forum post-esque story pointing back to the aforementioned blog site. Been notability tagged since 2012. I should also add, I suggest not looking up her nickname lest you find links to 'the Hub'. Aydo h8^[contribs] 10:36, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Video games, and United States of America. Aydo h8^[contribs] 10:36, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Internet, and Ohio. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:37, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Some coverage in Fox and CBS News [18], [19], Endgadget [20]... The name does bring up porn links, but we can still find some things about this granny. Oaktree b (talk) 20:01, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I am not convinced there is enough WP:SIGCOV for her to pass WP:NPERSON. There is an article on Igromania, but mostly an interview (primary source). Otherwise, she is largely mentioned in short anecdotes. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:56, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep With the additional sources found by Jovanmilic97, I change my !vote to a keep. It's clear that NPERSON is passed at this point. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:44, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Significant coverage in NBC News [21], Der Spiegel [22], The Columbus Dispatch [23], The Spokesman-Review [24], cz:Aktuálně.cz [25], has some brief commentary in The Village Voice [26]. Meets WP:GNG/WP:NBIO. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 11:33, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It would be helpful to evaluate whether they are solely known for being an older person playing games, which might be better to merge somewhere. The name and blog appear to be run by her grandson and how long did the MTV G-Hole segment run, not to discredit her part. IgelRM (talk) 11:39, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There's a consensus to keep, but some input from community and the other !votes will appreciated regarding the comments by IgelRM. Another round of discussion can't hurt.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 11:53, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep She's 100% individually notable enough an article at this point. The articles seem to be on the topic of "old person plays games," but at this point, she has become notable in her own right. DarmaniLink (talk) 13:24, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could you elaborate what lasting impact you see at this point? I could perhaps see a merge with Video game culture. IgelRM (talk) 11:46, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WePlay AniMajor

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NEVENT; no "enduring historical significance". Janhrach (talk) 17:09, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Events. Janhrach (talk) 17:09, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:32, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:34, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are more sources on ruwiki and I would suggest a merge somewhere in any case. IgelRM (talk) 11:13, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zero Hour (video game)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Found reviews in The Games Machine and Softonic, and a news mention in PCGamesN. While this isn't terrible it also isn't enough to pass WP:GNG because PCGamesN doesn't really offer up any critical opinions, and everything else is an unreliable source. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. While I think a soft deletion would work in this instance in case the game becomes super popular (it was released only three months ago), the article does not really have significant coverage aside from The Games Machine article. The Softonic article I would also consider more unreliable as it appears user-generated and may not be independent with a download link. Conyo14 (talk) 18:17, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, this is not a game for an international audience. It's targeted at local Bangladeshis, & it's quite popular here. That is why you will find numerous evaluations in Bangla newspapers. You can also read Sportskeeda's review and IGN's article, "Old-School Rainbow Six Spiritual Successor 'Zero Hour' Drops Launch Trailer" Prantoo Biswas (talk) 18:24, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sportskeeda is not reliable: WP:SPORTSKEEDA. Conyo14 (talk) 18:50, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment A source search should be conducted in Bengali per Prantoo Biswas to see if anything can be turned up. I'd do it myself, but I admittedly don't know the first thing about what Bengali sources are reliable, so I'll leave it in the hands of a more experienced editors. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 21:32, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:47, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It has notable sources attached to it. This0k (talk) 22:53, 11 December 2024 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 06:47, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which ones? Conyo14 (talk) 23:57, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Covered by The Daily Star, as well as their other potential game Agontuk. IgelRM (talk) 10:54, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:35, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Redirects