Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Code five

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. postdlf (talk) 02:35, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Code five

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

An article about a game that has been unreleased, and is currently not noteworthy. Heywoodg 21:04, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I fixed your malformed AFD listing, but as this is listed as 2nd nomination, was there a previous AFD? Monty ₈₄₅ 21:18, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. -- Danger (talk) 22:01, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Yes I believe there was. There was a proposal for deletion on 12:13, 26 March 2011 by Kateshortforbob. Is that the same? Oris a proposal different? Sorry if they are different, I am still learning! Heywoodg 22:25, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A WP:PROD proposal for deletion is a separate deletion process (as is speedy deletion), a defeated prod or CSD doesn't count as a previous AFD nomination, only previous nominations here do. Monty ₈₄₅ 22:39, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – I moved the AFD (without redirect) to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Code five so as not to confuse others as to what nomination this is. –MuZemike 22:48, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - zero verifiable information about this. Company website has vanished, no wayback cache, no Google hits, no anything. Marasmusine (talk) 10:55, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment there website has been experiancing glitches and is now up and running Nothercloth (talk) 00:52, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (I originally proposed the article for deletion.) The company website is here; the page given in the article is a 404. The company consists of a small group of young people; the game currently has not been released, there have been no previews, demos or "buzz". The gaming press has not written about the game, as far as I can tell. Mods are not normally notable - is the code, art, etc. entirely original, or is it still a mod? If the latter, there will be problems getting it published commercially. I don't mean to sound harsh, but an undeveloped game "pitched" by one teenager to another, with no coverage in reliable sources, is unlikely to qualify under Wikipedia's notability policy. --Kateshortforbob _talk 10:30, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - absolutely no coverage in reliable sources, and not that it matters, but there isn't any coverage in unreliable sources either. -- Whpq (talk) 16:37, 29 March 2011 (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.