Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/0 A.D. (game)

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 no consensus. Many arguments for retaining the page cite the fact that its existance is confirmed, but don't address the notability concern. Therefore while the keep votes outweigh the deletes, I see no strong consensus either way. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:10, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

0 A.D. (game)[edit]

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

Contested prod. The article is about an unreleased computer game, in violation of WP:CRYSTAL. Its sources do not meet WP:RS (being largely to the game's developer), and as such do not establish the subject's notability. This is a no-prejudice nom; an article may be suitable when/if the game is released and has had some independent coverage. EyeSerene^talk 08:14, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Whilst it's in development, is still exists today, you just can't compile and play the full thing. Also, given that it's open-source, it's more available then another game by a regular developer, in that you could probably play parts of it. That said, it could use with some more independent sources. --AlanI ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:54, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 12:27, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - the only WP:N-qualifying coverage (and only independent source) presented is the GameDev interview linked to under ELs. As always, I prefer multiple sources. If this is the only such coverage, then the game can perhaps be mentioned in our "List Of" articles instead, with no predjudice against restoring the article if more coverage is achieved at a later date. Marasmusine (talk) 13:14, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge - CRYSTAL doesn't really apply to a work whose existence is not in doubt. This leaves only the challenge to notability, which is valid, but the current article detail suggests that this is a matter for cleanup and not deletion. +sj+ 05:23, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- From WP:CRYSTAL: "All articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred." The notability issue means that even if this game had been released, there is currently insufficient WP:RS coverage to write a standalone article about it. Having said that, I wouldn't object to a merge provided that a suitable parent article exists - at present I can't see where this information would go. The game is already included in List of open source video games, and Wildfire Games seems to suffer from a similar lack of reliable sources. EyeSerene^talk 08:54, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: If this is free software, surely the screenshots are free too? We have the video on Commons (correctly, it would seem) but why are these screenshots being uploaded as non-free? If they ARE non-free, there are far too many of them... J Milburn (talk) 18:24, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Non-notable, especially since it seems it will never be released. As Eyeserene also higlights, there is a distinct lack of reliable sources to support the article's existence. Skinny87 (talk) 10:04, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - as per AlanI, Sj -- mkrohn (talk) 22:35, 7 September 2009 (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.