Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Magical Diary

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. v/r - T P 02:08, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Magical Diary

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

Seems to only have been picked up by a few websites. The GameZebo "review" includes a giant buy now button. Delete per WP:GNG. Odie5533 (talk) 00:37, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 02:47, 12 September 2011 (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) 20:12, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There are now 4 reviews in the article, including Rock Paper Shotgun (written by this guy). I think you're being a little harsh on Gamezebo, the casual game review sites tend to have buying options for the games, but I don't see how that's any worse than mainstream game sites having adverts draped over the background of everything. The games are cheaper so they push the game itself rather than adverts. GamerTell has been accepted as usable in previous AFDs (can't remember which, off the top of my head) and I've used Jay Is Games extensively for indie games. Someone another 22:53, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

JayIsGames is not a reliable source. The review is written by "Dora" and if you have any questions about the site you can contact either "Jay" or "JohnB" [1]. I do not believe Gamezebo has a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, and I can't even find evidence they have editors. The game has not won any awards, has received very few reviews in reliable sources, and has received zero news coverage. --Odie5533 (talk) 04:46, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

JohnB is John Bardinelli, a freelancer who took up the position of review coordinator on Jay is Games in February 2006. It is unfortunate that the site does not require reviewers to use their full names, but JiG is a well established indie game site with a sizeable, dedicated team. Gamezebo was launched by a former Yahoo! Games executive in 2006 ([2]), and started off with reviewers who had been published in several reliable sources (see the bottom of this), for instance Marc Saltzman of USA today has written numerous reviews there. It's not as good as a full editorial policy, but Gamezebo isn't some wannabe, it's a commercial site which has filled a gap in the indie game scene. Someone another 11:25, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just unfortunate, it's the sign of an unreliable site. From what I've seen, JayIsGames is not reliable. Gamezebo is really borderline. In any case, there is no news coverage of the game and it hasn't appeared in any print sources I've found. I do not believe the game is notable. --Odie5533 (talk) 11:51, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

keep Sources appear to be reliable and so meets GNG. We could take it to the RS noticeboard I suppose, but Jayisgames would seem to provide reliable reviews about video games. Gamezebo certainly does. Hobit (talk) 19:31, 17 September 2011 (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.