Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yetisports

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. (non-admin closure) Satellizer (´ ･ ω ･ `) 11:00, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yetisports

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

Doesn't seem to have any reliable sources to back up its notability. As well as parts of the article fails WP:GAMEGUIDE. GamerPro64 03:22, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 04:02, 1 November 2014 (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) 15:42, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Yetisports (series) and clean up (AKA properly source) - I see over 100k hits when I run a search through the WP:VG Custom RS Search. Of course the results cover not just the first game, but all of the different versions and sequels (e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4, etc., etc.). Coverage is widespread internationally too, with Polish, German, Russian, and Japanese RSes reporting (PL, DE, RU, JP) among others. So the series seems to be pretty well covered which indicates some that there's something notable here. I can't say I find a huge amount on just the first member in the series (i.e. the ostensible topic of our Wikipedia article), but merging what we have into "Yetisports (series)" and properly sourcing it might allow us to salvage some of the work that has gone into what we have so far. -Thibbs (talk) 12:26, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- If we can get that to happen, I'm all for the proposal. GamerPro64 05:22, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 01:17, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:27, 16 November 2014 (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.