Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trauma Zero

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 no consensus. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:53, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trauma Zero[edit]

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

I don't see how this product is notable. The references basically consist of a scan of the manual with the manufacturer's blurbs on it. Google searches for "Trauma Zero" or "T-Zero" deliver nothing. Drmies (talk) 02:52, 20 January 2011 (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) 03:21, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 03:21, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional Keep - obviously the quotes on the game manual should not be used to form the Criticism section, per WP:NPOV. The online Amiga Magazine Rack lists two magazines that reviewed the game under the name "T-Zero" in October 1999. Amiga Active issue 1 and Amiga Format 128: both reliable publications. Although I have no reason to believe that the reviews would be anything less than "significant coverage", I would need to see a page scan for verification (Amiga Magazine Rack list them as "unchecked"). Marasmusine (talk) 10:55, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
delete - farvebio —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.3.125.74 (talk) 00:34, 26 January 2011 (UTC) — 87.3.125.74 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:24, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep If at least two magazine reviews exist then it would be possible to build a start-class article with those sources, notability is just scraped. Someone another 15:09, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
delete - (wikipedia is not notable for this product) blindness of wikipedia has becomed unacceptable, i have deleted lot of my contributions (made during these years) and i'm leaving wikipedia, with many other people, because of snake vandalism (made often by envious people, often admins believing god itself).. so this is the sentence - wikipedia is not notable for this game (and much other links). have nice day there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rossalabastro (talk • contribs) 18:20, 31 January 2011 (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.