Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Video games - Wikipedia

Article Images

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.

Hero's Heart (video game)

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

Fails WP:GNG. Topic lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. Reliable video game web source search returns 0 useful results and I'm unable find any evidence of print sources covering the game. The1337gamer (talk) 12:39, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. The1337gamer (talk) 12:39, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions.~~ PriceDL (talk) 02:43, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Struck duplicate listing; already listed on the Video games delsort page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:05, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone took the time to see my edits, they'd know I added additional sources after this proposal for deletion. One of those sources is the creator of the games' own Website? And, if you read the actual article, you'll see that I'm just using a screenshot of the actual game's In-Game documentation that is hosted by MobyGames to provide reference data, not MobyGames themselves. This is kinda insane to be honest...I think 2x sources and a screenshot are qualified for bare minimums on a game that came out during an era where documentation is going to obviously be lax. --EarthBoundX5 (talk) 18:39, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To establish notability for Wikipedia, you need independent reliable sources (eg. review in published/online magazine with regular staff). Your sources are either not independent on the article subject, or user generated content. In both cases not reliable sources in Wikipedia sense. Pavlor (talk) 20:18, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So if an object doesn't get printed in a review, it is doomed to be lost to time? That seems unbelievably against the whole notion of preservation of knowledge...something I thought Wikipedia favored? It also seems to remove the concept of wikipedia all together...taking historical records out of the media and into a user generated realm, not the other way waround. Don't delete something because it's hard to find a source that reviewed it...if the author's site has evidence (http://www.kaser.com/mesh.html), 3rd party sites show evidence (https://www.classicdosgames.com/game/Hero's_Heart.html), and the media itself is shown as evidence (https://www.mobygames.com/images/shots/l/209599-hero-s-heart-dos-screenshot-nag-screen.png)...then that should be more than sufficient for a page to sit for others to add to over years? Do I need to petition some big media outlet to publish a story referencing the same martial I have in order for wikipedia to consider it sufficient? That seems crazy? And my god...wikipedia itself is user generated content... Would physical scans of the media uploaded to wikipedia be source material enough? Do I need to start digging through magazines from the early 90s that never made it to the Internet to prove this case? If so, then I know wikipedia is truly a dead source of knowledge. --EarthBoundX5 (talk) 20:45, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If there was some review published magazine in the early 1990s, then that would be (probably) really good source for notability. I agree it is somewhat hard to find non-online sources, but this task is not impossible, as many magazine scans are now online. Notability requirements of Wikipedia are now much higher than few years ago: page that was acceptable back then is now doomed to fail at AfD. Pavlor (talk) 20:55, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This was a Shareware game, many of which were never reviewed by any magazine but simply listed in advertising. My WP:BEFORE turned up nothing, therefore fails WP:GNG. Don't worry, Moby Games and other sites will preserve it. FOARP (talk) 13:36, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - As well as a fruitless standard search, I also couldn't find any significant coverage in a search of archive.org's magazine scans. (There was an ad listing in Micro Sistemas (Brazil) that included a title of this name, but that's far from significant coverage.) While it can be a little tricky to find information on games from this era, it's normally possible to find far more than this for any notable title. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, this seems to fail WP:GNG. Lowercaserho (talk) 14:40, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, home made game. no search engine results. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Perf115 (talk • contribs) 19:08, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Videogameplayer99 (talk) 21:46, 12 January 2019 (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.

The result was delete. Michig (talk) 08:16, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Zu Online

AfDs for this article:

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

Non notable video game that fails WP:GNG and WP:SUSTAINED. All references in the article are from the official website of IGG, making them primary. I was not able to find any other significant coverage from reliable secondary sources that satisfy WP:SIGCOV. Have in mind MMOHut, MMOs, Onrpg, MMORPG and MMOSite are all unreliable sources per WP:VG/RS, and looking at sources from the first AfD, they are interviews on MMOSite and IGN (making it primary sources) or just a passing mention like Gamasutra one.

True, this exists https://www.engadget.com/2008/01/23/first-impressions-zu-online/ (it is the same as the Massively source in the first AfD word by word), but that is it Jovanmilic97 (talk) 13:56, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:39, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - WP:BEFORE did not turn up anything beyond sources deemed unreliable. As stated by nom, there is a single legitimate source. I do not believe a single RS qualifies as significant coverage. The IGN link mentioned in the first AfD that was used as a reason to keep the article is an interview from the developing company, which would be considered a primary source. The fact that this was supposed to be an MMO and the only mentions of it are MMO aggregates and routine interviews/press releases (and a single post on a Minecraft forum), speaks to the lack-of-notability. There are/were so many MMOs created, this is another one that disappeared into the dust. DeniedClub ^{❯❯❯ talk?} 08:31, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. Subject fails WP:NVG. -The Gnome (talk) 12:23, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Briefly discussed in Social Exclusion, Power, and Video Game Play: New Research in Digital Media and Technology p. 111 in a paragraph about racial options for characters in fantasy worlds, but as more of an illustrative example than significant coverage of the game. So, unless there are much better sources out there, probably can delete without prejudice against recreation, should someone locate adequate RS later. Bakazaka (talk) 03:24, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. -- Scott (talk) 04:33, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Immersion Games

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

Does not meet WP:NCORP and WP:GNG. My WP:BEFORE search brings nothing. Issues are there for 8 years now. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 17:36, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:23, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:23, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There are definite mentions in the VGSE, and that's just in English. I don't think this is a good target for deletion. Not a keep, but not a delete either. --Izno (talk) 20:00, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colombia-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:35, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:35, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Agree with nom, I cannot locate any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability, fails WP:NCORP and GNG. HighKing⁺⁺ 17:07, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment To add my comment on the Izno's post, companies are held to a bigger standards per WP:CORPDEPTH. It is just not a notable company. Those are the links I have found as well, which are:
1. https://www.ign.com/articles/2008/08/04/immersion-games-annouces-new-studio is a PR piece (has even their email posted!)
2. https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/immersion-games-expansion-co-developer-of-cellfactor-and-monster-madness-opens-mexico-studio Press release which is not independent of the company
3. https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/110648/Immersion_Games_Expands_in_Mexico.php It is not in depth of the company which fails WP:SIGCOV and I am pretty much sure it is based on the press release posted at *2. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 19:13, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]