Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Terrordrome (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. Rlendog (talk) 21:42, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Terrordrome (Game)

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

Unnotable fan-made game. The article contains no sources, and when I searched, I could not find a single reliable third party source that mentioned the game. The article was previously turned down as a Speedy Deletion, however I still feel that it it eligible for deletion for failing Wikipedia: Notability Rorshacma (talk) 17:53, 20 January 2012 (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) 18:56, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:57, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Non-notable fan game. (If this were a legitimate game, it'd either get all sorts of coverage, and/or be in all sorts of legal trouble for using other company's IP. That, coupled with the creators only credentials are "Youtube User" makes me think this is not passing WP:GNG. Sergecross73 msg me 21:00, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Yep, this is a non-notable fan game (the creators of which did apparently get in some trouble for using the IP). Nwlaw63 (talk) 21:31, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No notability. SL93 (talk) 21:33, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Looks sweet, but unfortunately I can't find any relevant sourcing for the article. Someone another 18:54, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - No indication of notability -- Joaquin008 ^(talk) 18:51, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the above; no significant coverage found in reliable sources. Gongshow ^Talk 20:07, 27 January 2012 (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.