Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Clockwork Orange (computer game) 2nd nomination

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 of the debate was delete. Mailer Diablo 16:14, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A Clockwork Orange (computer game)[edit]

Previously nominated for deletion here: [1] AfD resulted in no consensus. Primary problem is that this is not verifiable. Only source is for the supposed Atari 2600 version of the game and is comprised of one screenshot of a cartridge hosted on a geocities site. Even if you take that to be verifiable based on the screenshot, it can't really be considered a reliable source. The PC version information is completely unsourced. --Isotope23 15:03, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per my nomination.--Isotope23 15:03, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Grafikm_fr 15:18, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP, I have shown evidence of the Atari game from a source about as reliable as much things about video games. I know that I read an indepth article about the computer game in the 1990s.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Browned (talk • contribs)
- Comment... ok, how is that evidence "as reliable as much things about video games"? where is the listing on Atari 2600 fansites? How about general videogame sites? One screenshot posted on geocities simply does not meet WP:V by a WP:RS. Furthermore, just saying that you read a indepth article on a game in the 90's doesn't meet WP:V unless you can actually cite the publication you read it in and an issue number.--Isotope23 16:37, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Verifiability is so important that there's a note about it directly below the edit window; if something can't be verified, it can't be on WP. -- Kicking222 16:52, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the thorough nom. --Hetar 22:18, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom unless verified properly.--Jersey Devil 07:44, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Generally I don't like an AfD again so soon after one is closed, but the problems identified are real. Perhaps the alleged game could be mentioned on the talk page for the film version and people could continue looking for sources from there if there are any to be found. Шизомби 01:49, 25 April 2006 (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.