Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beyond Protocol (2nd nomination)

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 delete. RL0919 (talk) 13:17, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Beyond Protocol

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Clearly a COI article that only serves to promote the subject. Out of the 14 sources on the article, 2 are screenshots of the game, an about us page, press release, source code / binaries, repositories but hardly any significant third party indepth coverage that clears the burden of WP:GNG.

Not surprisingly, this article was deleted 4 times previously and eventually salted. After it's current recreation, it was again nominated for AFD in this debate, however due to many SPA editors, the debate resulted in "no consensus". Nearly all keep votes were from SPAs that signed up to "vote".

I think it is time to delete this article now because it is not really eligible for wikipedia in anyway. Drewziii (talk) 12:25, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:33, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Attempted to search for sources from usual WP:VG/S areas. Although the custom search for the project has two pages of hits, I found them to be empty directory listings (or invalid hits to the Times about other topics). Metacritic lists zero sources, reliable OR unreliable, with no critic reviews ever submitted, and not even any user reviews. GameSpot has a directory listing with some user reviews, but no publication review. Gry-Online has what appears to be a substantial text block describing the game, but is an encyclopedic/directory entry as well, with no score or actual review. Jeuxvideo has two short articles without a writer byline, nothing indepth, and pre-release. And that's about all I could actually find. There is of course the old GameSpy preview, which looks deceptively like it may have kinda been almost an interview, but that's before release and even if it helps with WP:N, it's a single source. They didn't bother to do a review after release. -- ferret (talk) 14:07, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and above. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:57, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Could be relevant but article must be improved. GamedevExpert^{(Talk to GamedevExpert)} 5:26, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

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.