Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FitGirl Repacks

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 keep. Sandstein 22:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FitGirl Repacks[edit]

[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)

~~A search for reliable sources revealed nothing besides the Kotaku interview, which is really more of a primary source.~~ Only cites a couple of reliable sources, one of which is rather minimal. Last AfD did not dredge up any others of note. Does not seem sufficiently notable for a standalone article, fails WP:GNG (or WP:BIO). _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 13:58, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 13:58, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 13:58, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep TorrentFreak is a reliable source per WP:RSP. I don't see what has changed since the previous AfD which also resulted in a Keep consensus. Elli (talk | contribs) 14:06, 11 January 2022 (UTC)— Note to closing admin: Elli (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD. [reply]
I admit I missed the last AfD due to the article being moved. However, that changes nothing. Nobody in the last AfD brought up more sources and I am extremely surprised it wasn't a No Consensus decision if not an outright delete, discounting the WP:ITSNOTABLE keep !votes. Even including TorrentFreak and Kotaku, there are insufficient sources to pass WP:GNG. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 14:55, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also there seems to be some confusion about how many sources are needed to pass GNG - generally speaking, three is the agreed upon threshold for clear notability. While there can be two, those sources should be really high quality. I don't believe these pass that threshold, as the Kotaku article is just a paragraph. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 17:26, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, you don't usually need three sources to pass GNG. WP:THREE is mainly for editors who will throw a ton of sources that are merely passing mentions at you. Editors in the previous discussion agreed that the sources were sufficient for notability. Elli (talk | contribs) 19:11, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Saying that "editors agreed that the sources were sufficient" is misrepresenting the situation. There were 7 for and 4 against, and a lot of the "keep" arguments were extremely short like "seems strong enough to establish notability" and did not address the concerns of the delete voters, such as "Article fails to establish notability. You cannot possibly write a good and comprehensive article with only two citations" (left by Namcokid47). Again, I am surprised it was not a No Consensus result. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 22:18, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I've manually added the prior AfDs template, because Twinkle doesn't handle it well if an article was renamed post-AfD. No opinion on the merits of the nomination at this time. Vaticidalprophet 14:36, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I can swear we've seen this already and it was kept. Oaktree b (talk) 19:34, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Meets GNG with the existing sources on the article, the 'Meet FitGirl, The Repack ‘Queen’ Of Pirated Games' article from TorrentFreak and the Kotaku article in particular are strong sources, and cover the subject in detail, and I disagree with ZXCVBNM's assessment of the Kotaku article having "just a paragraph" about Fitgirl. Waxworker (talk) 20:55, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The sources in the article are quite strong; the Kotaku article is certainly much more than just a single paragraph. While articles are not actually required by policy to have three sources to satisfy WP:GNG (I generally say that two is enough), the article actually does have three sources, two of which are very high-quality and directly cover the subject. Mlb96 (talk) 22:17, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Only a small part of the Kotaku article is actually talking ABOUT the subject of the article in question, the rest is referring to other software pirates. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 22:19, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't the slightest idea what you're talking about. Around a third of the article is about her. Another third is about mercs123, and the last third is background information. Considering how long the article is, that's a substantial amount. Mlb96 (talk) 02:07, 12 January 2022 (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.