Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pro Evolution Soccer 2017

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 speedy delete. G5 ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 07:54, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pro Evolution Soccer 2017

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

An as yet unreleased game with no evidence of notability: sourced to blogs, YouTube, etc. (A PROD placed by McGeddon was removed by the creator of the article, without explanation.) The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:25, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 13:06, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 13:06, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ per WP:CRYSTAL. A game with this name probably will be released at some point, but the only secondary sources given are a possibly-hoax "leaked footage" video and a three-sentence blog entry about how Konami haven't given a date but the blogger reckons it'll be announced later in 2016. Not seeing any obvious press coverage of the game yet. --McGeddon (talk) 13:13, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Have flagged for speedy deletion per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sarojupreti, the creating editor was evading a block. --McGeddon (talk) 19:25, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. Well it's going to be released most likely, so will the version in 2018, 2019 etc. SHould articles be made for those as well? I'd think not. Anyway, once the game is announced and being released it's time to re-add it. RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:43, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. This seems more of a placeholder article than an actual encyclopedia article. --TL22 (talk) 18:32, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as clearly there's no solid material for a better article. SwisterTwister talk 05:34, 12 February 2016 (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.