Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Video games

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting
(Redirected from Wikipedia:CVG/D)
Shortcuts
Deletion Sorting
Project

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:
  1. 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.
  2. 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.
Note that 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 links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Video games.
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:
Purge page cache watch

See also Games-related deletions.

Video games-related deletions edit

Stick Soldiers edit

Stick Soldiers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails the general notability guideline but I would appreciate a sanity check from someone more experienced in videogames. – Teratix ₵ 12:23, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ganbare Goemon Kirakira Dōchū: Boku ga Dancer ni Natta Wake edit

AfDs for this article:
Ganbare Goemon Kirakira Dōchū: Boku ga Dancer ni Natta Wake (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:NGAME. Not enough coverage in reliable secondary sources. Does not need its own article. Clearfrienda 💬 02:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's also this Italian magazine that seems to have reviewed the game: [3] - Mika1h (talk) 10:22, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And here's a short review in a Spanish magazine: [4] - Mika1h (talk) 10:32, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as above, there are several secondary sources that refer to the game.
Oz346 (talk) 10:36, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above, meets GNG Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 21:38, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - There are sources talking about the game out there, which pretty much establish that it's a notable game. It's just that the article is poorly structured but can be improved. Roberth Martinez (talk) 16:28, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matt Alt edit

Matt Alt (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. The only source that meets GNG criteria is the article from The Japan Times. Normally, I would probably draftify, but the article has already been accepted previously at AfC by User:14 novembre. Most of what I found online was not independent of the subject. GMH Melbourne (talk) 09:31, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Granny (video game series) edit

Granny (video game series) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unfortunately non-notable as per WP:GNG on the basis of the lack of reliable sourcing and in-depth reviews. Know Your Meme and WikiHow are pretty cut and dry WP:USERG. A WP:BEFORE finds some brief analysis of a gameplay mechanic in the game in Game Rant [5] and some even briefer listicle-type assessments of the game in TheGamer [6] and Sportskeeda [7]. But I think this is well below the level of coverage needed as a whole if using the WP:THREE method. There isn't good guidance on notability for a series, but if there was one or two reviews out there for the other games, I would argue that a series such as this is not notable where (1) there's no in-depth coverage of the series as a whole body of work; and (2) none of the individual works in the series seem they would be independently notable. At any rate, open to views. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 07:22, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sago Sago edit

Sago Sago (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unfortunately the article currently falls well short of WP:GNG and WP:CORP. The article's three cited sources are either bulletin-style without commentary or trivial; regardless generally not WP:SIGCOV about the background of the company. A WP:BEFORE finds a lot of Sago products online but only a Verge product review and a staff interview from Kidscreen (?) seem to enter the standard of coverage needed. I imagine there may be more out there though. There's also a naming issue: if Sago Mini is the current name of the company, the article should not be called Sago Sago unless there is enormous coverage on the former state which is not the case. An obvious WP:ATD is to WP:MERGE what little there is to Toca Boca or Spin Master. Welcome any thoughts, particularly from users that are more experienced with notability pertaining to companies in this sector. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 23:48, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Business, and Internet. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 23:48, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We need to keep it forever by expanding it Tomasz22334 (talk) 23:50, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And the references too Tomasz22334 (talk) 23:51, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And even renaming it to Sago Mini Tomasz22334 (talk) 23:52, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I understand it can be a bit disappointing if there is consensus that the article is not notable. WP:GNG is generally a threshold for determining what articles should be included on Wikipedia because there is sufficient coverage to show that the subject merits an article. On keeping an article that doesn't quite meet that standard but could in the future, there's always the ability to develop an article in WP:DRAFT and we can definitely WP:DRAFTIFY the article as an option that doesn't involve deleting anything you've done. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 00:01, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Please expand it, add more references and rename and move it to Sago Mini to keep it forever as a result. Tomasz22334 (talk) 00:04, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's something that's up to you or an interested editor to do. The AFD discussion here is about whether the subject itself has enough coverage to merit an article in the first place. Although hopefully this discussion can settle whether there's reliable coverage out there. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 00:24, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. As far as I can tell, most of the information on it comes from either sellers of its products, or distributers of the TV show "Sago Mini Friends". Although it is a Spin Master brand, I don't know if there's enough verifiable information on it to justify a merge (especially since the Spin Master page already has most of the information that I could find). Ships & Space(Edits) 00:03, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Undo delete Tomasz22334 (talk) 02:21, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Please provide WP:THREE sources that talk about Sago Sago in detail. Proving notability is the only way you can help this article stay. Merko (talk) 19:36, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rick Jay Glen edit

Rick Jay Glen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No sources at all, lacks notability, extreme amounts of fluff - looks very much like just a self-promo page. Hornpipe2 (talk) 03:50, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • (comment) having some doubts over whether the IPv6 editor, and also the user "rickory", have a conflict of interest going on with this Hornpipe2 (talk) 06:39, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sources added. Content has been edited and cut down to remove fluff. 2601:644:9280:7C80:B58D:218D:9C58:17C8 (talk) 20:13, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unreleased third Minecraft album edit

Unreleased third Minecraft album (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Proposing a draftify or merge to C418 as an alternative to deletion. Unfortunately I think this album is non-notable for several reasons: (1) The album does not 'exist' yet per se; as it has not been announced, and most of the evidence relating to potential release or more information are primary interview sources that are several years old; (2) the album has not reached a point where sourcing provides any concrete details about its content at all, making it fall short of notability guidelines for unreleased material and too soon to justify an article; (3) as such, the article makes inaccurate or speculative assessments about the album, such as assuming the runtime will be >199:40 from a 2017 tweet or implying that the release will contain the songs packaged for the Update Aquatic version; and (4) the article's content is currently more a coalescence of things that Rosenfeld has said or done after the sale of Minecraft to Microsoft, which may be better covered as a section under C418. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 22:05, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Video games. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 22:05, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Obvious WP:NOTCRYSTAL delete, especially since if released it will have a real title and this will be an inappropriate redirect. Mangoe (talk) 02:19, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm fine with a delete here. The album is already brought up on C418's article and most of the sources used here are unrelated to the album itself or are somewhat poor. Has a lot of issues relating to fan speculation that I don't think can be solved since the album appears to be dead. Neo Purgatorio (talk) 02:21, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think that if this page is to be deleted, than the C418 article needs to be update to include more of the information within this article. WikiWilliard (talk) 07:08, 30 April 2024 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:7080:A33B:5CEE:B91F:8E63:A72D:D49 (talk) [reply]
Merge to C418, its too soon to have this article, maybe when the album actually releases, the article can be recreated. Samoht27 (talk) 20:06, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTCRYSTAL, WP:TOOSOON, etc. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 10:36, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
agreed 2603:7080:3D00:1890:0:0:0:1424 (talk) 20:43, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kelly Metzger edit

Kelly Metzger (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a non notable voice actor. The article doesn't even meet WP:THREE. The only source I see is for a convention that sources one of her works.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is disagreement over WP:NACTOR is met.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:52, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete She's had several significant roles but there is no coverage. Bold in following quotes is added for emphasis WP:Notability (people) (which includes WP:NACTOR) states: People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards. Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included; conversely, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included. WP:Notability states : Therefore, topics which pass an SNG are presumed to merit an article, though articles which pass an SNG or the GNG may still be deleted or merged into another article, especially if adequate sourcing or significant coverage cannot be found, or if the topic is not suitable for an encyclopedia Even WP:NACTOR only says may be considered notable. Schazjmd (talk) 14:11, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do You Like Horny Bunnies? edit

Do You Like Horny Bunnies? (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails general notability guideline. ltbdl (talk) 13:17, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ltbdl (talk) 13:17, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Passes GNG with two sources; they might be hard copy, but they help the article pass, and there are surely digital sources out there easily. Nate • (chatter) 17:52, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sexuality and gender and Japan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:38, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The above analysis is in error: both print sources in the article are WP:TRIVIAL mentions of the title in a listed example of adult games, they fall clearly short of WP:SIGCOV and do not establish WP:GNG. Without doing a WP:BEFORE, stating digital sources out there might establish notability is a WP:SOURCESMUSTEXIST argument. I have looked on WP:VG/SE and the Internet Archive and could only find a situational source review from Jason Venter of Honest Gamers here. One review is not enough coverage to substantiate notability. Maybe there's much more in terms of WP:NONENG sources out there. As ever, happy to change my view if more reliable coverage is found. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 22:38, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Both the game and its sequel got reviews from Absolute Games (review for 1 here, 2 here). Waxworker (talk) 02:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Great find! If there's one more out there, that seems comfortably notable for me. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 05:36, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The WIRED article and book excerpt are not actually about the game, but about eroge in general, and mention the game trivially. One Absolute Games review is not going to cut the mustard. MobyGames only lists said review and Animetric, and I am unsure of the reliability of the latter. An Internet Archive search also had only trivial mentions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:24, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. 🥒Greenish Pickle!🥒 (🔔) 07:50, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Vrxces's statement. MKsLifeInANutshell (talk) 14:34, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to ZyX (brand) the developer as ATD. Jumpytoo Talk 05:23, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: How do the delete !voters feel about a redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 02:31, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to ZyX. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:47, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Atlus USA edit

Atlus USA (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reads like a video game essay, insufficient standalone notability. Only source I found that might have sufficient coverage is the Game Informer one, suggesting merger with Atlus. IgelRM (talk) 02:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Companies. IgelRM (talk) 02:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Seems quite notable, cites over 77 sources, many of which are secondary. I will note that if language is an issue, just tag it. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 02:18, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I could have tagged for style but generally interviews, which are a large part of the sources, don't give sufficient notability. IgelRM (talk) 17:32, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: A fairly in-depth article that explains its significance outside of the parent company; several dozen hits when looking at a cursory Google Books search. I do not see a strong reason to delete. Why? I Ask (talk) 02:51, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I am assuming you are referring to "notable in its localization approach in preserving as much of the original", but I struggle to find a notable source for that and mentioned Game Informer article doesn't say it. It would help me if you could pick an example book with significant coverage. IgelRM (talk) 17:53, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Neutral: I know I'm biased, and if things go another way I'll accept the decision. If style and writing is the issue, then it needs a rewrite. Or maybe trimming down in places like that huge game list. --ProtoDrake (talk) 06:57, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (Biased means article creator here for outsiders) It only makes sense to rewrite if it is notable. The game list seems fine although ideally it should be sourced and maybe spun-out to a separate page. IgelRM (talk) 18:02, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:05, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 03:19, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Somewhat off-topic but the name in the lead was changed from "USA to "West" (as well as on the Atlus article), which does not appear to an official name. IgelRM (talk) 18:27, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, concur with others below, fails WP:THREE, see discussion on my talk Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 01:32, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Atlus. After (briefly) looking through the 77 sources and Google Books, I'm simply not seeing significant coverage of Atlus USA in reliable, secondary, independent sources. The article clearly has plenty of sources, but they're all trivial mentions (not significant coverage) or interviews (not secondary or independent), plus a few primary sources from Atlus. A few sources do border on significant coverage of Atlus, the parent company, but not Atlus USA, the subject of this article. The only source that is unequivocally significant coverage of Atlus USA is Game Informer, as mentioned above. Will gladly change my mind if anyone can point to two more sources that actually demonstrate SIGCOV. Woodroar (talk) 12:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Deliberating a possible merge: History section (except staff section, which does not appear notable) to Atlus; Localization approach section (mostly about localizing SMT) to Megami Tensei; Publishing section and third-party list into an additional section on List of Atlus games. IgelRM (talk) 19:02, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge I've been going back and forth on this one, but Woodroar more or less said where I ended up. The GameInformer is a huge in-depth source, but as I went through the rest, I simply could not find anything else. A few passing mentions in relation to games ("And Atlus USA is translating" and the like), and many of the non-interviews/non-primaries seemed to not mention Atlus USA at all. Calls for the !Keeps to provide at minimum three are unanswered at this time. -- ferret (talk) 13:15, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'm just curious, is there policy/precedent for not spinning out regional branches like this? Nintendo of America for example doesn't have a standalone article even though it seemingly could. I know WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS isn't an argument for or against deletion, I'm just wondering if there was some previous consensus on this. CurlyWi (talk) 17:20, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think ideally every single article is as comprehensive as possible, so I would need to ask why (maybe because of the section length?) and what a spin-out would improve. IgelRM (talk) 18:02, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per above. The article doesn't have enough in-depth sources to exist on it's own, most articles are about the Japanese developer. Swordman97 talk to me 03:42, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions edit

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Video_games&oldid=1222337253"