Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chatfield Video Games for 2009-10
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 speedy delete by Dank. —Korath (Talk) 03:03, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Chatfield Video Games for 2009-10[edit]
- Chatfield Video Games for 2009-10 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
No search results for this or The Media Authority. The article actually says "Not officially verified by anybody" at the bottom and the creator's user page says "I am not trying to endorse the team but rather advertising to the school my video games hoping to make at least some profit." Wikipedia is not for advertisements and it also fails notability guidelines as they are local video games for a local high school. Yarnalgo talk to me 23:53, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 00:29, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 12:18, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete. Pretty unambiguous G11 violation, then, isn't it? Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 13:50, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete, under several catagories... It is an article about an unverified list concerning unverified games... --Taelus (talk) 16:47, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong delete – Yeah, I have no idea what this article is about, nor can I find anything about this. Also I think the comment on the article's page not officially verified by anybody please don't delete doesn't help anything. MuZemike 23:40, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedied. As always when I speedy during an AfD, I'd appreciate it if someone else would do the paperwork and close. I'll restore the article if anyone wants to see it for purposes of this AfD. - Dank (push to talk) 03:01, 11 June 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.