Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Super 3D Noah's Ark

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. - KrakatoaKatie 02:15, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Super 3D Noah's Ark

This article has no references to prove its notability. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Slartibartfast (19 92) 22:23, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Try the {{unreferenced}} tag, or look for some references yourself. [1] gives me enough that I accept that this can be referenced adequately. The York Daily Record may not be the New York Times, but it's not Joe's Blog either. FrozenPurpleCube 22:42, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep worst case, merge it to Wolfenstein 3D. Eleland 22:48, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Good idea about the merge. I'll leave the discussion up for now, but if the concensus ends up as a Keep, I'll propose the merge on the article's talk page. Slartibartfast (19 92) 00:25, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would recommend merging to the producer of the game and mentioning at the Wolf 3d article. FrozenPurpleCube 01:52, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the article it'll be merged to can be worked out once the discussion is started on the article. Slartibartfast (19 92) 04:03, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, and a strong one at that. It's an commercial release by an established company, and a quirky little one at that. It's got references too, though they're not done in the "proper" format. Tag it for cleanup. --UsaSatsui 03:12, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment What parts need to be referenced and how could we find references for them? I remember some tme ago on another game someone tried linking to a download of the game itself and calling it a reference, and it was decided that wasn't allowed. Also, if this game is up for deletion/merging, how about HURL? The article is essentially mine alone, and I'm surprised it's done so well so far. If it's going to get deleted, I'd rather get it done now so I can just focus on the page on my website. Haplolology ^Talk/_{Contributions} 10:55, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:CITE should tell you how to do it. You need third-party sources about the game. The ~tsr page is a good one, the others...not so much. Just find some articles (web, newspaper, I think it's mentioned in "Ultimate History of Video Games", but I lost my copy) and cite them. --UsaSatsui 16:17, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Wikipedia is a collection of information. Just because it seems indiscriminate to you does not mean it is to everyone. Fosnez 15:07, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep definitely notable. Suva 17:42, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's an unusual part of gaming history, as the only unlicensed commercial release for the SNES (and the only game, therefore, to use its strange hardware), and for the oddity of having a famous shooter turned into a religious game. I'm inclined to think that all commercial console releases are notable -- there are a limited number of them, and they all get coverage in gaming publications -- but even if you don't agree with that, this one is more interesting than the average game. I'm sure there are reviews of it in gaming magazines of the time if the current references and these [2] [3] [4] aren't sufficient. (D'oh, forgot to sign...) Pinball22 13:25, August 28, 2007 (UTC)
Keep - a notable artifact of video game history. Korossyl 15:57, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There are adequate reliable sources available about the subject. Plus, something about a religious console game operating on illegally bootlegged code which features a pass-through port to sidestep the unlicensed cartridge issue really tickles my funnybone. RFerreira 23:00, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- They got permission to use the Wolf 3D engine. That's probably even funnier. --UsaSatsui 00:10, 30 August 2007 (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.