Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Voyage: Inspired by Jules Verne

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 Speedy keep. Bad faith nomination withdrawn. WJBscribe ^{(WJB talk)} 05:16, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Voyage: Inspired by Jules Verne[edit]

This is a niche product. Absolutely useless on wikipedia and I'll tell you why. No one knows about this game. It is too insignificant to be on wikipedia. I mean, the Adventure Company is barely afloat. This is better served on a company website not wikipedia. it is too insignificant and warrants deletion. Also the prose is so sloppy that it reads horribly. Shaanxiquake 23:55, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note the nominator has admitted here [1] that he only nominated another article by Paaerduag due to an ongoing conflict with him, saying "the act of nominating it was purely so that Paaerduag's work would be deleted". The same rationale seems to apply here. WJBscribe ^{(WJB talk)} 04:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

STRONG KEEP who is to say whether a game is niche or popular? this is a game, just like every other game article on wikipedia. why not target them? the 'prose is so sloppy' maybe it's not perfect but it conveys a point. honestly, don't tell me you're a sock puppet of Kiran90, seriously whoever you are, after vandalising my talk page you resort to using 'niche product' as a reason to delete a legit page? i don't know how to deal with some people on wikipedia, i honestly don't. --Paaerduag 23:59, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep perfectly notable, PC game that is available for purchase, and there are several articles on PC games on Wikipedia. Lots of effort gone into the article as well. If you think any of the prose is sloppy, then Wikipedia would be better served by you editing it than trying to get this whole article deleted. D-Angle 00:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Bad nom - significance isn't a criteria to be on Wikipedia, notability (as defined objectively be the guideline) is. Bad prose is also not a reason for deletion. Trebor 00:22, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Certainly sufficiently notable. Published by a notable company, based on a notable license, and most importantly, reviewed by plenty of reliable gaming web sites. -- Kicking222 00:24, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep Article asserts notability. Significant. Navou ^talk 03:09, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Weak sources to support notability, and promotes a commercial product. Edison 04:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Passes all policies I can think of. Nominator didn't even give a valid reason for deletion. --- RockMFR 05:22, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Maybe a bit of clean-up but I see nothing here to be deleted. Clever editor as well - his first edit was to do an AFD.... --Charlesknight 07:41, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The Adventure company is not an insignificant company; Khepos Studio does not appear to be insignificant either. About 19,000 ghits for the game, covering several languages. SkierRMH,08:32, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep to reduce clutter on AFD, this subject is clearly notable. Silensor 03:10, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. Bad faith nomination per my note above. WJBscribe ^{(WJB talk)} 04:35, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WITHDRAWL because this was done in bad faith and I don't want it to go any further. --Shaanxiquake 05:01, 9 January 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.