Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beyblade: GRevolution (video 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 SPEEDILY DELETED as a blatant advertisement. No prejudice against a proper article. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire - past ops) 07:33, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Beyblade: GRevolution (video game)[edit]

doesn't seem to be a notable video game Anshuk (talk) 06:41, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletions. MrKIA11 (talk) 11:39, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it's a commercially released gameboy advance game with reviews available. Someone another 12:34, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently this game is based on a particular series of the anime, Beyblade G-Revolution, so this should be Beyblade G-Revolution (video game). Someone another 12:40, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, per WP:JNN. Not a valid reason for deletion. 208.245.87.2 (talk) 12:48, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep Weak claim of non-notability from nom, third party reviews do indeed exist, etc. etc. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 17:18, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable subject, since it's a real game released by a major company. Article definitely needs to be tagged for improvement. Ancemy (talk) 22:45, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete — as far as the nom is concerned, I would agree with keeping per the sources present. However, the entire article is written in a spammish tone (akin to G11) to the point where a complete rewrite would need to be in order. Hence, I also see reason to delete but with no prejudice to recreation provided it can be rewritten in an encyclopedic and not in an advertisement tone. MuZemike (talk) 03:32, 4 October 2008 (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.