Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Bibites

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. ✗plicit 04:46, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Bibites[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

The Bibites

This article is about a game that is a simulation of evolving life. There is nothing in the article that implies that the game satisfies game notability or software notability, because there is no mention of any significant coverage by third parties. An examination of the references shows that none of them are independent or secondary.

Reference Number	Reference	Comments	Independent	Significant	Reliable	Secondary
1	the-bibites.en.softonic.com	Appears to be the official web site for the game.	No	Yes	Yes	No
2	itch.io	Web page to download the game	No	Yes	Yes	No
3	youtube.com	A discussion of the game	No	Yes	Maybe	No
4	youtube.com	An experience playing the game	No	No	Maybe	No
5	google.com	Google search results	No	No	Maybe	No

There is also a draft, which has been declined three times, after which the author copied the draft into article space. The article should be deleted. The draft can either be improved by adding evidence of significant coverage by reliable sources, or left alone in draft space. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:48, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Games and Software. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:48, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - This article was proposed for deletion by User:Nagol0929, but the PROD was removed by the originator. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:55, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There are no independent and secondary sources for my Wkipedia page to start with, so that is the reason why I did not add any to my page. Plus,the reason that I copied the draft into article space is because 1(I was just too impatient to wait for my draft to get moved to article space) and 2(I did not know how to move drafts into article space myself). Rtyjhnghfn (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: If, as the article creator says, no reliable secondary sources exist, this game does not qualify for an article. Also, @Rtyjhnghfn: especially as an inexperienced editor, your impatience to get the article published is not an excuse to bypass the Articles for Creation process. TornadoLGS (talk) 04:19, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or draftify. Fails WP:GNG as written. A case of WP:TOOSOON (particularly in the context of the author writing "I was just too impatient"...)? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:34, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I can't find any third party coverage on the subject, and the article creator's comments speak for themselves. Blue Edits (talk) 10:49, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per both WP:GNG and article creator's own words. Dawnbails (talk) 18:47, 30 May 2023 (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.