Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Janken Paradise

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. Wizardman 18:59, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Janken Paradise

Janken Paradise (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Delete unsourced one-line article about a video game, no indication that this product is notable. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 06:37, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. Someone another (talk) 09:14, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

• Keep per WP:STUB. Being an an unsourced one-line article is nothing wrong. Stubs all over the place. What happened to actually improving them instead of deleting? Furthermore, this game is notable and has been covered by reliable Japanse language sources. Ask a Japanese speaker to do a search, and don't delete per WP:BIAS. User:Krator (t c) 10:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - I agree with Krator. The stub hasn't even been around for a week yet. Yes Wikipedia should monitor and remove excessive content, but this stub hasn't even had the chance to expand past one line, let alone break any guidelines. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 20:58, 11 December 2007 (UTC))

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 16:57, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• Keep for now, per above. The article should be renominated if not expanded within a month or two. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 17:16, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Stub or not, it has to be sourced. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 17:56, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• Reply OK, Done. -Verdatum (talk) 20:25, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletions. —Quasirandom (talk) 18:09, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per WP:STUB. -Verdatum (talk) 20:25, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per WP:EP. —Quasirandom (talk) 20:32, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, since being short is not a crime. Coccyx Bloccyx (talk) 21:16, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
• Note to closing admin: after being here a couple of weeks, there is still no evidence of significant coverage in reliable third party sources showing notability see WP:N, regardless of the vote outcome here as AFD is not a vote. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:29, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

• WP:DEADLINEUser:Krator (t c) 19:55, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

• Keep as it is has references in a videogame encyclopedia published in Japan. Reference added. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 02:55, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep as above, no need to hold any kind of WP:BIAS against this stub. (jarbarf) (talk) 05:50, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - I see a junkload of WP:ITSNOTABLE and WP:JUSTAVOTE comments in this deletion discussion. It would help if Nihonjoe could come up with better sourcing than a scant mention in a crufty offline encyclopedia. As of yet, I'm not convinced it's noteworthy, so I go with delete, which could be changed to strong delete or keep, depending on what can be said about the sources. For example, does the source simply have a list of thousands upon thousands of video games? If so, it still has to pass our notability guidelines. The Evil Spartan (talk) 12:15, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Where do you get off calling it a "crufty" encyclopedia? Have you ever read it? It's several thousand pages long and has entries for most (if not all) video games released up until it was published. Updated versions of the encyclopedia are published every year, and it gets bigger every year. It's considered one of the top authorities for video games in Japan. Each game has an entry, varying from several hundred to many thousands of words long. The entry for this game is several hundred words long. The source does not have to be notable (though in this case it likely is), just reliable. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 17:58, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Non-notable. Google hits I found come from gamespot.com, gamefaqs.com, cheatcodesclub.com and similar - nothing I would refer to as reliable 3rd-party info. It's just a little video game, no article needed. PKT (talk) 17:00, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Google hits are not necessary or even acceptable as a determiner of notability. None of those sites have significant coverage of older systems like the 3DO, so using them as a measuring stick is useless. Besides, GameFAQs and CheatCodesClub are not reliable sources, and GameSpot is iffy in many cases. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 18:54, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

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.