Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Video games

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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.
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:
Purge page cache watch

See also Games-related deletions.

[edit]

Plants vs. Zombies (disambiguation)

[edit]
Plants vs. Zombies (disambiguation) (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)

Only the first game and the franchise go by the name of just simply "Plants vs. Zombies" meaning that this disambiguation page is absolutely not needed. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 00:21, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article doesn't disambiguate anything, Zxcvbnm's statement is right, and Sergecross is also right. MK at your service. 12:48, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Article just has the list of Plants vs Zombies games on it and nothing else and it seems unlikely anything else would be called "Plants vs Zombies". Knockknock987 (talk) 15:15, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

* Speedy Keep Sources were easy to find that call the games Plants vs. Zombies 2 etc. Dr vulpes (Talk) 00:57, 4 September 2024 (UTC) [reply]

    • Schiller, Mike (2013-09-20). "Game Picks". The News and Observer. Raleigh, North Carolina, United States of America. pp. D2. Retrieved 2024-09-03. 'Plants Vs. Zombies 2' "Plants vs. Zombies 2" (iPhone; Free; Rated 9+) is a little more graceful about the way it goes about the free-to-play business model, as it rarely feels as though paying is a requirement to enjoying the game. While it is frustrating that, after finishing one world, you have to either pay money or collect stars by replaying levels, collecting stars never really feels like that much of a chore. This is largely in part to another challenge system. Rather than simply doing what you've already done, you get variations on the levels with new requirements. It's a good thing they took the approach of offering variations on the levels, too, because the core play style of "Plants Vs. Zombies 2".
    • Snow, Nathan (2017-04-28). "Plants vs Zombies Heroes great strategy intro". The Daily Spectrum. Saint George, Utah, United States of America. pp. A4. Retrieved 2024-09-03.
    • Delete I'm a fool and managed to misread multiple things. Dr vulpes (Talk) 02:15, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What does that have to do with the disambiguation page? No one is suggesting we delete Plants vs. Zombies 2 page itself... Sergecross73 msg me 01:52, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oops I thought they were talking about the game titles having more content in them then just Plants vs Zombies. Guess I misread that one! Dr vulpes (Talk) 02:13, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, kind of figured it was something like that. Sergecross73 msg me 03:47, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but those games are not called Plants Vs. Zombies. QuicoleJR (talk) 02:06, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Covet Fashion

[edit]
Covet Fashion (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)

lacks significant coverage from reliable sources, failing to meet Wikipedia's notability standards. Loewstisch (talk) 13:54, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vector TDx

[edit]
Vector TDx (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)

Got reviews from IGN and PocketGamer, everything else is an unreliable source or trivial mention. Attempts to find significant coverage in magazines failed. Doesn't seem to pass the notability threshold for a new article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I think this might get there. Small review from The Guardian [1]. My read of WP:SALON.COM is that it's borderline as a source. ~ A412 talk! 15:35, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's fairly small, so I won't immediately withdraw the nomination, though I do admit that it might push people to "weak keep". Now I essentially have no opinion about whether it should get deleted or not. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:06, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I dug through the web and found few more sources: Four more passing mentions on IGN, JayIsGames (twice), Four more passing mentions on Kotaku, and a few more articles on PocketGamer (1, 2, 3, 4). Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 10:16, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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 redirect‎ to SimCity 2000#Development as an acceptable ATD. Owen× ☎ 00:30, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fred Haslam (game designer)

[edit]
Fred Haslam (game designer) (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)

Nothing notable about this individual (at least according to this article) Theknine2 (talk) 15:32, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to SimCity 2000#Development, which has the most information out of his associated works. Couldn't find so much as an interview. ~ A412 talk! 17:01, 3 September 2024 (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.

SureAI

[edit]
SureAI (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)

Appears to fail notability, a timeline of released works. IgelRM (talk) 17:03, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. They are one of the most well-known game modding groups.
The main issue I see is that much of what I added to the history section uses SureAI's self-published timeline as the main reference, but the page was established as notable before I even did this. I think better sources may be needed, but that doesn't qualify this for deletion. TheSmumbo (talk) 03:11, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just to explain my reasoning, I did not nominate because of the use of self-published sources. I think the article does not go beyond a database entry and I could not find sources to change that. IgelRM (talk) 23:26, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Fails WP:CORP. The Eurogamer article is the only one that is significant coverage, not enough to meet notability. The rest are news stories that focus on the games they were developing, not the company. They don't "address the subject of the article directly and in depth". See also WP:CORPDEPTH: There should be "coverage that provides an organization with a level of attention that extends well beyond brief mentions and routine announcements". All of these news articles are just that "routine announcements", not significant coverage of the company. --Mika1h (talk) 09:30, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Each article has at least 1-2 paragraphs of coverage of the company. Some have more. Sure, I wouldn't say it's an "obvious keep", but I do think the coverage adds up to NCORP. C F A 💬 16:18, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Per WP:CORPDEPTH: "collection of multiple trivial sources does not become significant". --Mika1h (talk) 22:48, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Several paragraphs about the company is nowhere near "trivial". Some of the articles aren't entirely about the company itself, and instead focus on the company's games, but they still offer some significant coverage that counts towards NCORP. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material. C F A 💬 00:10, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    A modding team, that won multiple awards, including The Game Awards for best fan creation (2016), multiple mods of year awards from several publications, now a full game studio with several releases.
    That's like saying Christopher Nolan isn't notable, only his movies are. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:37, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No it's not, organizations have higher notability requirements than people. Coverage of companies products doesn't contribute to the notability of the company. --Mika1h (talk) 22:48, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, if Mr. Nolan has no sourcing about him, we can't create an article for him. Oaktree b (talk) 00:15, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It really depends on how much weight we give the Eurogamer feature (which also intends to highlight modding in general). In my view, because the majority of information here can only be gleaned from primary source, a good legacy section on Enderal would make more sense. IgelRM (talk) 00:17, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This would be a good compromise. TheSmumbo (talk) 05:25, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Enderal, their most notable project. This is why I don't like the extreme narrowing of CORP that has taken place over the last several years. Yes keeping commercial spam off of Wikipedia is important, but removing coverage of organizations(including one that in this case was originally not for profit) that produce notable products doesn't help our readers if the pages aren't poorly written promos, as this one is not. Eluchil404 (talk) 00:02, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Coverage I find is all about Skyrim mods, I suppose we could have a brief mention there, but there isn't much of anything about this company themselves. Oaktree b (talk) 00:14, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is about SureAI themselves. Likewise, [11][12] is a two part interview of SureAI's project lead. Another on RPGWatch [13] and GamerGlobal.de [14]. This is about the future (in 2021) projects of SureAI (i.e. Dreadful River). There's plenty more, i.e. the awards they won etc.... Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 01:36, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Reviewing several of the above linked articles I agree there is sufficient notability and coverage that the subject is worthy of an article on Wikipedia, including the Eurogamer article and others. For clarity - WP:ORGCRIT was explicitly created to require stronger criteria are to "prevent gaming of the rules by marketing and public relations professionals", and I see no evidence of such gaming here. (For the record - I am discounting the Articy articles as these do not appear intellectually independent of the subject). ResonantDistortion 22:08, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I'd go out on a limb and say that they are probably the most famous mod maker of all time. Enderal alone is arguably the best single player mod of all time (and also one of my favourite RPGs of all time), and all 3 of their "mods" are really just fan made games just using the engines of actual for profit software. we have i believe standalone articles for much smaller and less well known video game companies, so deleting this article solely because their games were free and technically considered "mods" by some would be a mistake, in my opinion. Best regards, Kasperquickly (talk) 16:40, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Notability is not inherited, and this fails WP:NCORP. Arguing that other companies exist with fewer references is WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Note that this is not debating that their games are notable. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:46, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is literally the rule that everyone ignores on wikipedia, because if they didn't, the whole ruleset would fall apart. Reminder, this encyclopedia has a rule specifically mentioning that stuff known for only one event is not notable, yet it has hundreds of individual articles about stuff only known for the Kennedy's murder, including a standalone article about the rifle he's been shot with. Come on. Kasperquickly (talk) 23:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Enderal as per the suggestion above by Eluchil404 seems like the best WP:ATD option considering that the topic company fails GNG/WP:NCORP criteria for establishing notability. *None* of the sourcing meets the criteria, several Keep !voters have provided sourcing to suggest the company meets the criteria but those sources are either relatively high-level descriptions of the company (therefore failing WP:CORPDEPTH which requires in-depth content about the *company*) or rely on information provided by the company/team (e.g. by way of interviews, thereby failing WP:ORGIND as the *content* is not independent). HighKing++ 12:50, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

[edit]

Redirects

[edit]
This section is transcluded from Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 8. (edit | history)

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

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Video_games&oldid=1244925919"