Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RPG Toolkit

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. W.marsh 18:26, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

RPG Toolkit

Non-notable game engine, fails WP:SOFTWARE. Prod removed by Shannara, who considered it "vandalism". Percy Snoodle 10:28, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Interesting project, and certainly a fun program, but definitely does not conform to WP:SOFTWARE.--Rosicrucian 14:56, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

• Comment I wrote most of the current text for this article and I am involved with the software, so I will only comment. I would argue that the software in question passes the first test of the proposed guideline on software notability, WP:SOFTWARE:

The software package has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the company itself.

The RPG Toolkit received brief treatment in Game Pro magazine in 2003. (I have no evidence of this, and a quick search found only broken links to an image of the page. But it's true.) An older version of the software has an editor review with a rating of five at download.com [1]. Additionally, it has supposedly appeared in several other magazines. The software is affiliated with none of the sources mentioned.

However, proposed guidelines aside, I doubt whether anybody would actually look up the Toolkit in Wikipedia, except somebody who already knows of it. As I am involved with the project, I will leave it to others to consider the arguments I have mentioned. Colin 03:14, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. -- moe.RON ^{talk | done | doing} 02:09, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - Doesn't seem to meet WP:V/WP:RS. Wickethewok 16:13, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - per nom. Anomo 07:06, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

• Keep If The 3D Gamemaker survived deletion, surely this could? DotDarkCloud 22:55, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
  • And it looks as though more work went into this page than The 3D Gamemaker's stub of a page DotDarkCloud 22:58, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Comment the 3D gamemaker wasn't deleted because "it's just a stub" isn't a reason to delete pages. "it's not notable" is. Percy Snoodle 14:01, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

• Weak delete. As a professional in the game industry, I am aware of this product's existence, but I just can't find any proof that it's genuinely notable, aside from the fact that it does have a good presence via Google.[2] However, most of that looks like "marketing" hits, instead of bonafide reviews or acclaim. If it could be shown that this software had had some reviews in major game industry press, I might change my mind, but until then, I'm afraid I have to side with the "Delete" crowd. For now, this product might be worth mentioning on some larger list of game development software, but it's not appropriate for it to have its own article. If more acclaim becomes available later, the article can be re-created. --Elonka 18:18, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

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.