Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cantr II

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Deletion discussions are a sampling method to help determine what the community at large feels about an issue, and to examine the relationship to relevent policies and guidelines. There are no arguments presented that would justify over-riding established and broadly accepted inclusionary standards, and while there was little participation by established community members, it was sufficient to determine that consensus to delete exists. - brenneman {L} 00:13, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cantr II[edit]

No indicated notability, seems to fail WP:V, WP:WEB and WP:SOFTWARE. Some additional info: Alexa ranking is 194,501 and it scores 51,000 google hits. Peephole 16:11, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Information about the game should be verifiable in the game's documentation or community discussions, which satisfies WP:V; it's too early to see whether the "critical evaluation" will be sourced, but give that the benefit of the doubt. As for the other two, it looks like the page is being edited. Wait and see. Sho Uemura 17:18, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. PresN 18:33, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, no indicated notability. RandyWang (raves/review me!) 02:41, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep looks like a unique concept to me --Nick Roberts 04:39, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep otherwise, may as well delete other wikipages such as World of Warcraft's. --Lassaris 10:11, 7 August 2006 (GMT+10)
  • Keep I use the CANTR wikipages regularly and the information contained in the pages is verifiable in the game. If these pages are not considered suitable for wikipedia then neither are any of the other RPG games pages listed. --Dinallt 18:49, 7 August 2006 (UTC)— Possible single purpose account: Dinallt (talk • contribs) has made little or no other contributions outside this topic..[reply]
    • Comment: It is true I have not made contribitions outside this topic but why does that invalidate my contribution to this one? I haven't seen a topic on which I wanted to make a contribution before. Dinallt 12:11, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Google-backed, referenced and mentioned in plenty of gaming webzines, as valid as any other RPG article. --Drivera90 19:09, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • User has twenty-three edits prior to this discussion. - brenneman {L} 00:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment:Actually, there isn't a single reference and i don't know what the hell google-backed means.--Peephole 19:31, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment:There isn't a single reference? And you've read every single webzine ever released? I've read several that have mentioned Cantr as a prominent society simulator, and if you don't know what google-backed means, I suggest you don't make such radical claims as it apparently not having a single reference. Ta.--Lassaris 10:32, 9 August 2006 (GMT+10)
      • Comment:I meant there wasn't a single reference in the article. --Peephole 15:33, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep -- References present to nearly 20 genre-specific sites, zines, presses excluding its own Webzine (listed seperately on Wikipedia) including for example Userfriendly.org, etc; also referred in Wikipedia-like informative sites such as About.com and Answers.com. The references certainly attest to the subject's credibility as being significant and innovative in the MMORPG and RPG genres. Also noted that there were countless references to Cantr in other Wikipedia pages (e.g Text-based, MMORPG lists, etc) way before being subject for deletion as the date history will correlate. (Granted, I also don't know what "Google-backed" means, unless it is describing the even larger list of outside references to Cantr by Googling it) Czneddie 12:14, 9 August 2006 (GMT-5)
    • User has twenty-five edits prior to this discussion, seventeen to the article. - brenneman {L} 00:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: Oh please, I have removed all of these. Not a single one was a reliable source (see WP:RS). They were just directory listings, blogs or online editable encyclopedia's.--Peephole 16:40, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Comment: Does that include the -- GameWyrd's Mark of Approval Dinallt 12:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Comment: And that quoted is: GameWyrd's Mark of Approval goes to Cantr II . Here we see kingdom roleplaying at it's best. It's not about engineering the perfect combat character, it's about social engineering and legacy building. The Award Council liked that.Lassaris 3:45, 12 August 2006 (GMT+10)
  • Delete after precident set by the GraalOnline AfD, which was endorsed at deletion review. Daniel.Bryant 06:17, 13 August 2006 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Cantr_II&oldid=1145519591"