Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Leung (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. Mkativerata (talk) 06:58, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Leung (video game)[edit]

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

Google search shows only the developer's website and a few random youtube clips which may or may not have anything to do with this. Only major contributor has clear COI issues. Sven Manguard _Talk 05:47, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could an admin look up the history of the page Mark Leung and see if it is relivent to this issue. All I can see is several Speedy deletes per BIO. Thanks, Sven Manguard _Talk 05:50, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- It's a succession of bad, unsourced, and short biographies. From the external hyperlinks I infer that they are about the person mentioned here. They contain very little information, some peacockery, and no citations of independent reliable sources. Uncle G (talk) 00:58, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete spam for non-notable web content. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 00:35, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as blatant self-advertisement of non-notable product. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:36, 12 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) • Gene93k (talk) 17:02, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:02, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete (A7) – Does not show any relevance whatsoever. Not even Mark Leung has an article, which says something, also. –MuZemike 23:25, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Regular delete - The Kotaku link shows that it is at least verifiable, however I could not find any other reliable coverage, significant or otherwise. It is not blatant advertising, and A7 does not apply to products. Note potential influx of keep monkeys. Marasmusine (talk) 12:10, 13 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.