Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cyber Troopers Virtual On Force
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 no consensus. Mailer Diablo 19:42, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Cyber Troopers Virtual On Force[edit]
Article is completely unsourced, failing Wikipedia policy on verifiability. It contains no reliable sources, is filled with original research and speculation, and contains unencyclopedic detail. The article has been around for six months, with frequent contributions by several editors, all of whom have not seen fit to add sources. On these grounds, I believe that the article should be deleted. Captainktainer * Talk 19:02, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep a quick Google search yielded plenty of info (though the game is also sometimes called 4 Force Cyber Troopers Virtual On apparenty) including photos of a cabinet. It may not have been released in the US, but it exists and there's quite a lot of info about it. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 22:02, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I only found 139 hits[1], of which most were Wikipedia mirrors, two were results from Wikipedia itself, a handful of Japanese websites of unknown contents, about forty a remake of that and other virtuaroid games, and the remainder of which are attempts to sell the soundtrack. I found 2 "unique" hits for the alternate name you provided. I do not dispute the fact that it exists. I dispute the accuracy of all the facts in the article, because there are no sources. This article violates all of the content-applicable core Wikipedia policies, and a six-month editing history has not led to even a good-faith attempt to add sources. With sources to back up all the claims in the article, clearly it will be notable enough to remain. Without them, we risk spreading lies or half-truths across the internet, as with the Siegenthaler controversy. Captainktainer * Talk 22:35, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- You seem to be confusing unverified (which is not a deletion reason) with unverifiable (which is). You said the article has been around for six months and has had many editors work on it. Try slapping a verifiaction template on it, give it awhile and see if things improve. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:14, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, it is a valid reason for deletion. If information is unverified, it's original research, which is the second criterion for deletion. I could understand if the article had been around for a couple of weeks or a month... but the article has been around for half a year, and there is no indication that any of the information is true. Since there are no web-based sources available, and since there haven't been any major edits for over a month, and since the article is in flagrant violation of all core Wikipedia content policies, it should be deleted, barring a last minute rescue by some games-loving hero. Captainktainer * Talk 00:59, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- You seem to be confusing unverified (which is not a deletion reason) with unverifiable (which is). You said the article has been around for six months and has had many editors work on it. Try slapping a verifiaction template on it, give it awhile and see if things improve. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:14, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I only found 139 hits[1], of which most were Wikipedia mirrors, two were results from Wikipedia itself, a handful of Japanese websites of unknown contents, about forty a remake of that and other virtuaroid games, and the remainder of which are attempts to sell the soundtrack. I found 2 "unique" hits for the alternate name you provided. I do not dispute the fact that it exists. I dispute the accuracy of all the facts in the article, because there are no sources. This article violates all of the content-applicable core Wikipedia policies, and a six-month editing history has not led to even a good-faith attempt to add sources. With sources to back up all the claims in the article, clearly it will be notable enough to remain. Without them, we risk spreading lies or half-truths across the internet, as with the Siegenthaler controversy. Captainktainer * Talk 22:35, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Delete unsourced, original research gamecruft, per Captainktainer. Wikipedia is not a game guide. --Wine Guy Talk 23:07, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Consider that this game rarely, if not never, release outside Japan. Search by using 電脳戦機バーチャロン フォース should be more effective. Now, the article itself seperate in two main section, I don't see much problem in Overview part as it involve only basic information. The problem is in second part, Virtuaroids. I don't think it's really an original research, it might be translated from somewhere, but I have no solid prrof on this so it's obsolete (may be this site?). It might be good idea to trim down the section and merge those info with Virtuaroid article instead, as I think they fit there perfectly. L-Zwei 12:41, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Anything not supported by references is either original research, a copyright violation, or a hoax, and should either be referenced or deleted by Wikipedia guidelines. The policy on reliable sources and verifiability is ironclad; we can't keep an article if it isn't sourced. Captainktainer * Talk 16:50, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Delete - this is copper-bottomed, gold-plated, gilt-edged OR. Completely unsourced. If this stays we may as well through the sourcing policy out of the window. BlueValour 02:45, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. SevereTireDamage 12:32, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and cleanup. The Virtuaroids section needs to be rewritten to remove OR or removed completely for now. That said, the rest of the article is certainly worth keeping. --SevereTireDamage 12:32, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and clean up Whiel thsi game was never released in any English-speaking territory, it is part of the Virtual On series, some of which were released in to the U.S., so it is notable to English-speakers. It does really need sources though. It is possible a lot of the current contents are OR, but it isn't inherently OR and is fixable. Ace of Sevens 12:57, 29 July 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.