Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jetman (video game)

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. David Fuchs^(talk) 00:50, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jetman (video game)

This article fails WP:WEB. Specifically #2 on WP:WEB. It shouldn't matter if it's part of Facebook. If it is noteworthy because it is part of Facebook, then I can think of plenty of other Facebook flash games that would need an article based on this logic. Jon Ace ^T ^C 22:17, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Jetman has over a quarter of a million daily active users[1] on facebook. This game hasen't even been around for a year and it already has had that much support. The "I can think of other games that don't have an article" part is not a reason because these are different games with a different fan base. There could just be people who don't want to spend time to get an article together. But in all seriousness, the game hasn't been around long enough to win any awards. It just came out last August. Tavix (talk) 00:28, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"These are different games with a different fan base" So? If Game A has X amount of players and Game B has Y amount of players and Y is greater than or equal to X then how is Game A more noteworthy than Game B? Just because some fans of Jetman decided to create a page on Wikipedia doesn't make it notable. Jon Ace ^T ^C 05:43, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 17:52, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Lacks the multiple reliable secondary sources needs to satisfy WP:WEB, the one that is there looks OK (just OK), but a web search the other day didn't turn up any other sauces. Someone another (talk) 19:36, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - lacks reliable sources to establish notability --- Whpq (talk) 22:29, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, non-notable Facebook application. Was previously deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jetman (facebook), but does not appear to be G4 material. --Core desat 11:48, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It may not meet other standards, but to say it's a "non-notable Facebook application" is patently false. Nearly THREE MILLION people have it currently installed and who knows how many more have tried it. The daily usage is almost double that of Counter-Strike, a game whose popularity (and notability) is indisputable. Look at the page for Crysis: does it get a huge entry because it's released by Microsoft? Jetman has 20x more players than Crysis, yet because it's an indie release isn't "notable." To say, as someone else did, that "the number of people using something doesn't make it inherently notable" is ridiculous. Almost every medium measures "notability" by usage statistics, at least in part. Think newspapers: if one citizen has a heart attack one day, it won't even get a blip. If 250,000 citizens all have a heart attack on the same day, it's immediately notable -- and newsworthy. Methinks some of you don't quite comprehend how incredible (if not important) it is that 3 million people have this game. That it isn't backed by a mega-coporation with a PR department and placement in Best Buy does not mean it isn't "notable." So... UNDELETE POR FAVOR. Pariah23 (talk) 19:27, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral. This game is one of the most popular Facebook applications today. I would say Keep per WP:POTENTIAL and WP:N but on the other hand facebook applications hardly have enough history and dynamicism to warrant its own article, so maybe Merge and Redirect would be more appropriate. Billscottbob (talk) 03:45, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
WP:POTENTIAL is an essay and isn't a policy or guideline (besides, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball). This was deleted before with nearly unanimous consensus, and it's only been a month. The number of people using something doesn't make it inherently notable. --Core desat 22:45, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. If the decision is to delete, perhaps a redirect to Jetman (character) or Lunar Jetman might be appropriate? Tevildo (talk) 01:31, 12 January 2008 (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.