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

Superleague Formula 2009: The Game

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

This game fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:NVIDEOGAMES. Looking at it via WP:BEFORE, not a single review exist for this game. Neither a single source exist for it too. Sank without trace like the eponomous race series. SpacedFarmer (talk) 22:29, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. SpacedFarmer (talk) 22:29, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Motorsport-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:46, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Seems highly obscure; I fail to see the sourcing here. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:19, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Superleague Formula#Other ventures per WP:ATD. IgelRM (talk) 08:46, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Luigi video games

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

This article seems to be highly OR in terms of what is considered a "Luigi video game." A quick BEFORE yields little to no results for an overarching series bar Luigi's Mansion, which seems to be notable as a separate series. However, every other entry just happens to be every time Luigi starred in a game, with no clear reasoning as to if it's meant to count as a "series" or not. (As no source I can find links together a Game & Watch Luigi game and Mario is Missing! to any of Luigi's later solo games, for example) The Luigi's Mansion series seems notable, but every other entry this list doesn't seem to have the citations needed to really verify that they're part of a series of video games, nor do they verify that these games are even notable as a group beyond starring Luigi in them. The current article feels very unneeded, given there's nothing claiming notability for this being a notable sub-category of games, and a grouping of video games that just so happen to star a notable character just doesn't hold water. Even if the article were to be focused on Luigi's Mansion, it would need a complete TNT. This list feels better off deleted, with a Luigi's Mansion series article being made if editors find that the subject can be made into a separate article, but the concept of "Luigi video games" just doesn't seem to hold weight as either a series or as a notable sub-collection of videogames. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:22, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I could definitely see this as a useful article. The reader (mainly gamers) would be able to tell which games are more focused on Luigi even if there is no leading "Luigi" title for game (ex. Mario Is Missing!). However I do think it should have been created after there were more than 15 installments, rather than 9. I feel like it leans more on the Luigi's Mansion series for notability. Sackkid (talk) 04:31, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These are definitely a lot of my problems with the current list. There's very few entries, most are unrelated to each other bar a shared protagonist, and it leans heavily on the Luigi's Mansion series as it's the only really notable "series" there. If people want to see what games Luigi featured in, his navbox is still there (Even if that also needs work) or, at worst, this article could be lightly merged into Luigi's article, so that way those interested in seeing Luigi's starring games can find them there. (Not my preferred outcome, but definitely an idea if people feel it worthwhile). Outside of the Luigi connection, these games don't really hold much water as a group, and a guy starring in a set of games does not make that subcategory of games separately notable. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:37, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:22, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Are we really claiming the Luigi games aren't a spinoff? Seriously? Nintendo even did a Year of Luigi promo which is currently a Good Article. While it's not as large a sub-series as Mario, trying to deny it exists boggles the mind and we certainly aren't hard-up for hard drive space that would necessitate folding it into the Mario series. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:53, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I literally cannot find sources indicating it exists under one banner, and outside of Luigi's Mansion, the only separate game series I can find relating to Luigi is Mario & Luigi, which is a separate series and not entirely focused on Luigi. As it currently stands, the list is just a miscellaneous assortment of games starring Luigi with no verification of the series' own separate notability. Compare this to something like Wario (series) or List of Yoshi video games, which have multiple successful series that can be verified even with a quick Google search. You are right in saying that these games are spin-offs, but they aren't really tied together in a way that shows inherent notability bar happening to be associated with Luigi.

As a note, Year of Luigi doesn't really focus on the Luigi games as one series, with the games released under that year being variations of pre-existing games. Dr. Luigi is a spin-off of the Dr. Mario series, Mario & Luigi: Dream Team is a single entry of the wider Mario & Luigi series, and the various Luigi "remixes" are just variations of pre-existing games. There was a focus on games having Luigi in a starring role, but trying to say that immediately makes a random collection of games notable is like saying Shadow the Hedgehog has his own series because he's had big roles in several games and had a whole year dedicated to him as well. Luigi's Mansion is really the only one here that can be uniquely verified as part of a wider, notable branch of games. A list like this is the equivalent of attempting to make a "List of Pikachu games" and just lining it up with Pikachu's assortment of unrelated spin-off games that aren't branched under one umbrella (Games, for example, like Hey You, Pikachu! and Detective Pikachu (video game) focus on the character, but are not part of an umbrella franchise starring the character like characters like Yoshi and Wario are).

My problem with this list is not a matter of "trying to deny the Luigi games are spin-offs" or some bizarre thing like that, but rather that this list doesn't verify how the games featuring him are individually notable of the original Mario franchise, nor does it contain sourcing verifying the Luigi games as one major umbrella property like other notable Mario characters happen to have. This list is simply unverifiable. If you or anyone else can dig up sources noting these games are part of one whole umbrella, with notability and description inherently separate from the Year of Luigi or the Luigi character, then I'd be happy to withdraw since I just happened to miss stuff in my search. But right now as it stands, the list just lacks the things it needs to really meet guidelines and justify a split off any other article. I do hope this clears up my viewpoint a bit. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 05:14, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:03, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning keep but I see where the nom is coming from. Luigi is too interlinked with Mario (being his sidequick) to really rise to stand-alone Wario (series) or List of Yoshi video games status, but he's also further along than Princess Peach and Toad (Mario) (who both have several games named after them but no sub-franchise article). It seems Nintendo keeps pushing for a new stand-alone franchise, even if it's currently mostly Mansion. Since Mansion doesn't have an overarching series article yet (but could have) and instead hatnote-links to this list, I'd rather keep this list and see where Nintendo takes it, until we can decide how to best present the information. – sgeureka ^t•c 07:16, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sidenote, how List of Wario video games is featured and how it is different from Wario (series) doesn't make sense to me. IgelRM (talk) 18:49, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is... bizarre. I didn't even know there were separate articles for both of these until now. There's a lot of content overlap there that should probably be merged, but that would require a heavy amount of editing and decision making to accomplish that's not within the scope of this AfD. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 18:53, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - While I can see an argument for there not really being a Luigi series, maybe there's an argument to be made about repurposing it into a Luigi's Mansion series article instead, which is more of a concrete, actual series? Just a thought, currently undecided on what to do personally. Sergecross73 msg me 15:53, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I do agree that something like this might have potential (specifically the potential for a Luigi's Mansion series page), but I'm also agreeing with Pokelego's stance on how to handle this. It's hard to tell what exactly a "Luigi video game" is, and this list has nothing worth saving even in the event a Luigi's Mansion series article, or something on the lines of that, is created. λ NegativeMP1 16:40, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Luigi's game appearance are covered on Luigi#Appearances and I think the article is below WP standards as is. But considering the Mario franchise has similar lists like List of video games featuring Mario, I don't think the scope of this AfD can resolve anything. IgelRM (talk) 18:40, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That list very much feels like it fails Wikipedia:INDISCRIMINATE given it's covering every time a video game happens to feature Mario, one of the most iconic characters of all time who is so frequently referenced and parodied that a list like this seems very useless in terms of use. It feels like it'd be better off rebranded to being a list of Mario franchise videogames, but that feels like a separate discussion that would take place outside of the scope of this AfD. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 18:55, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Luigi#Appearances. Agreed with the nom that there isn't a "Luigi series" and that this list presents original research issues in implying such a series exists apart from appearances of the character. The alternative to deletion is to redirect to the existing section on Luigi appearances, which is what a reader looking for this topic would be least astonished to arrive. czar 02:38, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It falls under WP:COMMONSENSE given that all the games both have Luigi in the title and star him as a main character. Original research is going out and confirming something that isn't obvious. We shouldn't be spending time debating whether grass is green or 1+1=2. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:39, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If these can't be verified as unified group, then it's just a collection of every game Luigi's happened to star in with no other real connecting thread. Yes, we can verify these games happen to star Luigi, but that's not really the point of this. The point is that this list simply is not verifiable as defining what a "Luigi video game" is, nor is it able to show why this subset of games is notable beyond happening to focus on Luigi. The collection of games themselves are not unified by a connecting thread like other Mario series articles, such as Yoshi or Wario, and no sources verify if they can be. This list simply does not meet Wikipedia's standards. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 16:17, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. If there is no "Luigi series" and this is a list of games featuring Luigi, then we should view it as a summary style split from Luigi#Appearances. I don't think the sourcing warrants the split. czar 18:19, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I think it is definitely notable even it does lean on the Mansion series. But overall, it is definitely helpful to readers including myself. Sackkid (talk) 23:26, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Hale

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

Appears to fail Bio notability. IgelRM (talk) 07:15, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Video games. IgelRM (talk) 07:15, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nevada-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:19, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 20:59, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nostalgames

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

Fails WP:N. Not seeing any demonstrated notability for this game developer. There is no significant coverage in reliable sources. Skazi (talk) 21:56, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Russia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:39, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Zenless Zone Zero characters

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

WP:Gamecruft, in-universe list IgelRM (talk) 19:34, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Lists. IgelRM (talk) 19:34, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect Wikipedia is not FANDOM, and this would need a total rewrite to be encyclopedic and less of a game guide. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:19, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As someone who has contributed to this list it pains me but I agree it has gotten a bit unwieldy. I'd offer a compromise to just create a simpler list of the characters, where outside sources can be found about them, and then Merge with the main Zenless Zone Zero page. Pushpaizol (talk) 15:55, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - as a plausible search term, but this list would pretty much need a WP:TNT to ever exist. It's written entirely like wikia/fansite type stuff. One could check and see if any fan wikis could use it I suppose. Sergecross73 msg me 18:58, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Zenless Zone Zero, the character list is short enough to have in the main article for now. Jumpytoo Talk 19:52, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Unless the appropriate weight of real-world perspective content is given, I would still prefer merging. However, seeing VulcanSphere has started building up the real-world parts of the article, we can wait a few days for improvements to show up. SuperGrey (talk) 15:05, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sources are abundant (see the ref ideas in the talk page), it just needs to be incorporated into the article. SuperGrey (talk) 15:29, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's good that there's some out-of-universe content out there. That would upgrade my stance to "merge"...but not to "Keep", as I still don't see the need for a separate character article when the parent article is so short. Sergecross73 msg me 16:33, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Catan (2008 video game)

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

Got a GameSpot review - that appears to be all there is with regards to significant coverage. Due to this, fails WP:GNG. Anyone searching for sources should not confuse it with the different 2007 and 2009 games of the same name. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:23, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:23, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Catan#Video_games. Not sure why this needed to go to AfD, given there is a perfect alternative to deletion redirect target. Doesn't meet WP:GNG and I couldn't find much in my searches. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 08:42, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moved this to Merge per below, my comment stays the same. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 22:45, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Catan#Video_games. Two short reviews by PlayStation: The Official Magazine: [1] and Play: [2]. Article by Dengeki PlayStation: [3], describes the general Catan gameplay but not the differences in the PS3 version. No critical analysis. I have a hard time seeing how this could be used in the article. Then there's routing news coverage by Wired and Siliconera: [4], [5], [6]. --Mika1h (talk) 08:52, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Catan#Video games per WP:MERGEREASON. Sergecross73 msg me 10:23, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

.io games

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

Besides the Rock Paper Shotgun article, this fails WP:GNG. The redirect should be restored, as before, since there are not enough reliable sources to make a genre article and the rest of it is clearly WP:SYNTH. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:52, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:52, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge to Browser game. Agree on lack of notability but it is a valid classification of a game platform.
— Masem (t) 23:01, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:08, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per Masem, Browser game seems like a very reasonable merge. Aaron Liu (talk) 04:23, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Per Masem. Not notable for an article, but is notable enough to merge to Browser game Felicia (talk) 14:33, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge this redirected to .io#Usage prior to an article being created, but I suppose Browser game is a better target. For what it's worth the article creator currently has this article nominated for speedy deletion. --Here2rewrite (talk) 16:53, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Inter-Services Public Relations media productions

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

Fails WP:NLIST. Mention insignificant work. WP:NOT DIRECTORY — Saqib (talk I contribs) 06:44, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 06:44, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs, Film, Television, Video games, and Lists. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:24, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, it's just raw list and not much explanations about the production company. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 11:58, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - In agreement with the nominator and previous voter. The article has no encyclopedic context or explanatory value for the interested reader. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:38, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP - This is a part of ISPR's main page. Just like many other pages have separate list pages. For example, Tom Hanks has a separate list page called List of Tom Hanks performances and credits. Another huge list is List of songs recorded by Lata Mangeshkar. Every production house has a separate list for their work like List of Paramount Pictures films (2010–2019). So, strongly KEEP.--Ameen Akbar (talk) 18:51, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:31, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Ameen Akbar. Muneebll (talk) 19:02, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Muneebll, OK but Ameen presented an argument that wasn't based on policy. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:05, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom. NOTDIR and fails NLIST. No notability for a standalone list. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:03, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:09, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Jon Radoff

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

Appears to fail WP:NBIO - while it does have a piece of significant coverage, the InfoWorld article, the others are just announcements and primary source interviews without substantive discussion. It does not pass WP:NARTIST either due to the fact he was just a co-developer or director of most games he made. When the article was first made it also failed NBIO and does not seem to have remedied that situation. There are a lot of minor mentions, but a lack of SIGCOV. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:36, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Video games. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:36, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, still fails the If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability. as most of them are primary and just trivial Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 05:51, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: ComputerHope database entry. This appears to be a follow up from Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Beamable, note that gamerDNA, founded by Radoff, also has an article.. IgelRM (talk) 21:23, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When you add this Ars Technica article, combined with PC Gamer and Boston Globe articles, I do think GuildCafe/GamerDNA passes WP:NCORP, so I will not be nominating it for deletion. Though I can't say the same for its creator yet. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:30, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But the Ars article heavily quotes Radoff, so I think WP:ATD would be feasible again. Not going by guidelines briefly, GamerDNA appeared to exist from 2006 to 2011(?), while Radoff had a career from 1992 to now. IgelRM (talk) 00:22, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Is there an ATD being suggested somewhere here in this discussion? Please identify a suggested target article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:36, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I think keep the article if we use the sources from GamerDNA and Disruptor Beam and maybe merge GamerDNA here. Sources for Disruptor: gamesindustry.biz, gamedaily.biz, pocketgamer.biz IgelRM (talk) 17:15, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Portugal 1111: A Conquista de Soure

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

Fails WP:GNG, with few reviews or significant coverage in reliable sources. This is one of the only reviews I could find, and it's in a publication of uncertain reliability. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:39, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Portugal. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:39, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Lists PTGamers.com and Gamerstek.com under external links. Primary source [7] IgelRM (talk) 12:29, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Both sites are now dead, which doesn't speak towards their reliability. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:58, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~Keep - Gamerstek review is archived here: [8]. According to their about page, they had a video game section in Destak newspaper, which indicates some sort of reliability. However, it's a moot point if there are no other potential reliable sources since 1 review is not enough. PTGamers.com review ref seems completely dead, but looking at their archived main site ([9]) there doesn't seem to be an about page or similar, I can't find anything to indicate any reliability. --Mika1h (talk) 18:36, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to mention that Push Start ref, which is an independently published digital magazine, seems unreliable to me looking at the editorial page: [10]. --Mika1h (talk) 18:46, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gamerstek and Mega Score reviews are enough for GNG. --Mika1h (talk) 08:58, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - The game got in-depth coverage in a June 2004 issue of Mega Score, including an interview (p.30, 31), and a review (p.70, 71). The only other coverage I was able to find is a brief mention of the game in a 2021 article from the newspaper Observador about video games about Portugal. It's possible that the game got coverage in Portuguese newspapers at the time of release (Newspapers.com has no Portuguese newspapers unfortunately and I wouldn't know where else to look), as the Observator article and the interview in Mega Score indicate that the game was partially funded by Soure city hall. Waxworker (talk) 19:05, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I found a dead link from TSF (radio station). It might be useful to mention the game on the Visão article. IgelRM (talk) 13:49, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 21:21, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the reviews presented above. Two reliable reviews, good enough for me. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:05, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Reviews presented show the page can be retained. Add the 1 paragraph in Observador (linked above by Waxworker) https://observador.pt/2021/03/17/nao-e-so-em-civilization-vi-ha-mais-4-series-de-videojogos-onde-pode-controlar-portugal/ ; a 5-page article dedicated to the game: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235915242_Um_estudo_das_dinamicas_de_apropriacao_do_jogo_Portugal_1111_-_A_Conquista_de_Soure_em_contexto_escolar and I think that should be enough. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 23:44, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Observador source is a list with a few sentences about the game. SBGames, the paper's publisher, is the "Simpósio Brasileiro de Jogos e Entretenimento Digital", not sure that is enough. IgelRM (talk) 21:03, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting because although there is a consensus to Keep there is a challenge on whether sources are of a sufficient quality to establish notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:27, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Redirects

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 15#Nuzlocke