Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kuriki (2nd nomination)

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. MBisanz ^talk 00:17, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kuriki[edit]

No sources, no evidence the game is notable or even exists or is more than something someone cooked up in school one day. Previous discussion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kuriki) gave no support for keep, so why wasn't it deleted? Noe (talk) 12:46, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS. Something went wrong when I added it to the AfD list on Dec. 21, so today, Dec. 28, I've added it again, and also added pointers at talk pages of involved editors. Thus, the 2nd nomination was not really effective till today.--Noe (talk) 12:05, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not oppose. I do suggest we add a redirect Kuriki -> Mia after the deletion, though. Thanks for keeping me informed, by the way! Cheers, CapnZapp (talk) 13:28, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (sort of). According to da:Meyer (terningspil) Kuriki is synonymous to Mia (game). I'm really no expert, but a merge seems appropriate. Power.corrupts (talk) 14:29, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I (the user who nominated Kuriki for deletion) added that to the Danish page some time ago, on no other authority than en:Kuriki. So that hardly counts as a reason to keep!--Noe (talk) 23:59, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The original article was deleted via AFD several years ago. This is a slightly different version. Joyous! | Talk 15:15, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info, Joyous! As nothing in the articles indicates the issues leading to the first delution have in any way been remedied, should I nominate this for speedy deletion, then - or will it go away soon anyway?--Noe (talk) 15:53, 1 January 2009 (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.