Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kung Fu Live

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 Marasmusine (talk) 08:58, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kung Fu Live[edit]

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

A YouTube clip, a blog written by a developer, and a press release. Epic fail of notability criteria. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 14:03, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: AfD completed by GiftigerWunsch [TALK] on behalf of the nominating IP, using the rationale left of the article's talk page. I am currently neutral to the debate. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 14:09, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep despite the theoroughly unimpressive article and sources, it does seem to be getting some mainstream attention, for example this. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:20, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) Reach Out to the Truth 03:14, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep - reliable sources search returns plenty of hits, with 15+ usable sources with significant coverage on the first two pages. A quick search could have saved the trouble of bringing this to AfD. --Teancum (talk) 15:31, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that disagreeing with the nominator's rationale is not grounds for a speedy keep: per WP:SPEEDYKEEP, it is only applicable when the nomination is purely disruptive, the nominator withdraws it, the nominator is banned, or the article is either a policy or guideline page, or linked from the main page; none of these criteria seem to apply. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 16:03, 17 October 2010 (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.