Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jikkyō Keiba Simulation: Stable Star

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. (non-admin closure) Satellizer (´ ･ ω ･ `) 12:00, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jikkyō Keiba Simulation: Stable Star

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

No indication of notability. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:27, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral/Weak keep - I'm not sure about this one, really. The reason why I say weak keep is that there is a prospect of expanding it, there's a large enough JaWiki article regarding the game. George.Edward.C – Talk – Contributions 14:52, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 19:45, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:45, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:45, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 00:41, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete. Here's the deal. It has no hits or notability in English-language video game reliable sources, and there are no worthwhile redirect targets. However, the jawp article has four sources from 1996. This said, I can't figure out what they are for the life of me. If they are articles in magazines that someone can get, what do they cover? The jawp has no footnotes so I don't know if it's an ad or a full article or something else. If they're reviews, I could see this sticking around but until then... please ping me if more (non-English and offline) sources show in the future. czar ♔ 16:07, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 07:52, 14 November 2014 (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.