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

RealFlight

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

Fails WP:GNG. I couldn't find coverage other than from hobbyist blogs. FlightGear is a potential redirect target, as the article says it's a commercial rebranding of that software, but RealFlight is not mentioned at the target. ~ A412 ^talk! 18:26, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Aviation, and Software. ~ A412 ^talk! 18:26, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Only sources that exist in the article are self-published and thus fails WP:GNG. Protoeus (talk) 00:37, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gameplay of Dragon Quest

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

This is the same scope as Dragon Quest, which already covers the gameplay of the series, including its history and its reception. This takes many of the same sources, and writes a worse article that focuses more on material that violates WP:VGSCOPE and WP:GAMEGUIDE. There is a consensus at the Video Games WikiProject that we shouldn't create this type of WP:REDUNDANTFORK, since there is nothing here that isn't covered at Dragon Quest. I would consider a redirect, but I don't see material that would be suitable for a merge. Shooterwalker (talk) 17:34, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games. Shooterwalker (talk) 17:34, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The gameplay itself does not seem to have been widely discussed by reliable sources and therefore fails WP:GNG. I do wonder about our similar article Gameplay of Overwatch, whose gameplay has been discussed at length, but apparently only by gaming magazines and similar sources. Anonymous 17:55, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Dragon Quest#Gameplay per Pokelego999 Anonymous 18:11, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Dragon Quest. While I would normally argue delete, deletion removes many viable redirects which are valuable targets. After the recent Gameplay of Pokémon AfD, I had to recreate many redirects that are genuinely useful search targets that got caught in the cross-fire of the article's deletion. Additionally, the redirect helps if anyone is, for some reason, wanting particular information on the Dragon Quest series's gameplay. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 17:59, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Dragon Quest#Gameplay - As stated in the nom, this really does appear to be a redundant fork. Pretty much all of the common elements of the series included in this article are already covered in the franchise article. Likewise, the "Reception" and "Legacy" sections are just discussing the reception and legacy of the franchise as a whole, which is also fully described at the main Dragon Quest article. Rorshacma (talk) 08:21, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per above, was an unnecessary split. Sergecross73 msg me 14:03, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rainbow Computing

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

Fails WP:NCORP; I'm unable to find more than a passing mention of this defunct retailer. It's mentioned briefly at the two references (first can be found in IA circa 2006), but not at a level passing WP:SIGCOV. In general that appears to be the pattern: a mention that someone worked there, or that someone bought something from there, but not substantial information on the company itself. ~ A412 ^talk! 16:45, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and California. ~ A412 ^talk! 16:45, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Newspapers had gobs of ads but no real articles. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 17:23, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nebulae (video game)

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

Non-notable per WP:GNG. French kickstarted MMO that seems to have been in open alpha for some time with no real routine or review coverage. It looks like there is some broadcast French interviews with the developers which are WP:PRIMARY sources and not very helpful for notability. An English WP:BEFORE found nothing, but accept some French WP:NONENG coverage might be out there. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 06:50, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 06:50, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The sources are mostly interviews. I only found a local investment source online from Matot Braine. Delete IgelRM (talk) 12:01, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, no independent sources. Maybe just a WP:TOOSOON, and it could be notable when it actually comes out. ~ A412 ^talk! 18:31, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Star Wars Republic Commando (series)

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

Fails WP:GNG. No significant coverage for this series or "multimedia project". Even if you see this as a list, it seems to fail WP:NLIST. Only thing I found were articles about a Battlefront 2 update adding a Republic Commando character to the multiplayer mode: [1], [2]. They don't imply that Battlefront 2 is part of the Republic Commando series. Suggesting merge/redirect to Star Wars: Republic Commando#Sequels. Mika1h (talk) 12:23, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy, Literature, and Video games. Mika1h (talk) 12:23, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Star Wars: Republic Commando#Sequels per nom. ~ A412 ^talk! 18:33, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Clare Siobhan

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

Does not seem to meet WP:NBIO or WP:GNG, only mention in a to me seemingly reliable publication is a mention of three sentences. Red Bull source seems to be an interview, probably not intellectually independent. AlexandraAVX (talk) 09:23, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Video games, Internet, and England. AlexandraAVX (talk) 09:23, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Super Penguins

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

This game is not notable as there are no RS that discuss it. What I see are primary sources that are minor reviews Seminita (talk) 08:56, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Seminita (talk) 08:56, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Doesn't seem to have much significant coverage from Pocket Gamer or VentureBeat. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 01:37, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Even with the mentioned sources it still does not demonstrate sufficient notability. MimirIsSmart (talk) 09:45, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not finding anything additional from WP:VG/SE and the located sources are not sufficient coverage for WP:GNG. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 10:42, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Double Fine Comics

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

A list of webcomics. The ancient last AfD had one keep vote for lack of rationale. There are two separate articles on minigames, My Game About Me: Olympic Challenge and Tasha's Game. I don't believe the The International House of Mojo is an independent source here. IgelRM (talk) 00:20, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Webcomics. IgelRM (talk) 00:20, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Last AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Double Fine Action Comics IgelRM (talk) 00:21, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to propose merging the small-scale games into this article, but I am exceedingly frustrated at how few of our sources on those actually even mention the source material for them. The Comics Alliance source seems like the most solid one here, but that doesn't carry an article. I got nothing on Double Fine Action Comics in my books either, and sadly I've become incapable of searching the web due to changes to google, so I will have to concur... Merge and Redirect into Double Fine. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 10:31, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WiiLink

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

Fails WP:GNG, sourced to primary sources. Best I could find was this single source on a project that merged with them: [3] and this passing mention [4]. ~ A412 ^talk! 17:36, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Software. ~ A412 ^talk! 17:36, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Article is reliant on primary sources and fails WP:WEBCRIT. Jordano^5³ 18:19, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: No significant secondary coverage from reliable sources. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 02:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for lack of significant news coverage.Shinadamina (talk) 08:43, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Moarnighar (talk) 15:00, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Westballz

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

Top esports player who lacks significant coverage to prove notability. The profiles from Red Bull and ESPN are a good start, but the rest are either web articles of questionable reliability or independence (theScore eSports, EventHubs, G2 Esports) or routine coverage of changes in teams / sponsorships. Bridget (talk) 20:36, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Video games, and California. Bridget (talk) 20:36, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - These two ESPN sources [5], [6], the Red Bull source [7], as well as published unauthorized biography [8] probably pushes the subject over the edge in terms of notability. 14:00, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Thanks Pbrks, were you able to find more info about the book or its author and publisher? The lack of info makes it look a bit suspect, and the blurb isn't too useful. Bridget (talk) 14:40, 29 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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:46, 22 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!} 23:10, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails NCORP. No significant coverage. The Edge article is questionable as a reliable source. In any case, the coverage in that article is about the story of a person, not the company. Canada Media Fund article is routine coverage pertaining to funding, and commentary about funding, as noted in NCORP, is not acceptable as sourcing for notability. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 06:03, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Coverage of funding for a company is not acceptable for notability criteria per NCORP, including in g-biz. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 06:07, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete None of the sourcing meets GNG/WP:NCORP criteria although perhaps a redirect to one of the games would also be applicable, if a suitable redirect (perhaps Outlast?) is agreed. HighKing⁺⁺ 11:31, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Redirects