Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adventure Quest (LARP)

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 09:51, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adventure Quest (LARP)[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)

Appears to fail WP:GNG. TheSandDoctor ^Talk 03:22, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Entertainment-related deletion discussions. TheSandDoctor ^Talk 03:22, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. TheSandDoctor ^Talk 03:22, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 19:06, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 19:06, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 19:06, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP: I have added a second secondary source, and removed the primary sources. The two RS secondary sources now establish notability. Guinness323 (talk) 16:22, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have added a third secondary source as well. Guinness323 (talk) 16:34, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep based on additional sources that were added per WP:PRESERVE. BOZ (talk) 20:49, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This appears to be an organization, or a information product; so applying WP:NCORP, or WP:NPRODUCT, notability threshold is not met, because multiple, widely circulated WP:SIRS is not satisfied. Graywalls (talk) 19:03, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep sources suffer a bit from being fairly local, but appear otherwise to meet the requirements of the GNG (and local in this case is covering a few million people). Hobit (talk) 02:37, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 00:28, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - At the very least, shouldn't this article be renamed? Based on all three of the sources added, and even the information currently in the article, the actual organization is called "Renaissance Adventures", with "Adventure Quest" just being one of the types of activities they run. Rorshacma (talk) 01:00, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not a single source meets the criteria for establishing notability. We require detailed coverage of *the company* as per WP:CORPDEPTH and not just a review of the experience of LARPing. We also require "Independent Content" as per WP:ORGIND and not articles based on interviews/quotations from company execs. Of the references added, this from Denver Parent is from a parent praising the existence of a nearby camp and the fact her family loves it. It contains no in-depth information on the company and fails WP:CORPDEPTH but the giveaway is that it is tagged as "PR Sample". Fails WP:ORGIND. This reference from Boulder Weekly is entirely based on a interview with the founder/CEO, fails WP:ORGIND. Finally, this from Denver Post is churnalism and based on information provided by the company and an interview with a company exec, fails WP:CORPDEPTH and/or WP:ORGIND. Topic fails GNG/NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 10:15, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not seeing any significant coverage or reviews. At best, this can be redirect to some List of LARPs or such where it can be briefly mentioned. PS. Also, the article is a WP:TNTable mess - mixes an organization, a product, a holiday camp... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:04, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Erb? Did you read the sources? They are very much significant coverage in the form of reviews. Hobit (talk) 22:57, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This article is not about the company but about the product produced, specifically a specific role-playing LARP. Whether or not the company is notable, the LARP is, according to the sources cited. All the talk about the corporation is a complete misdirect.Guinness323 (talk) 04:17, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If the article is specifically limited to the one product, and not the company as a whole, then it is a definite failure of the WP:GNG. Of the three sources that were added since the AFD started, one does not even mention the "Adventure Quest" product, and another only has a couple sentences. Rorshacma (talk) 16:01, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Taking the article as it currently exists - limited to the single product produced by the company, it is a complete failure of the WP:GNG - as I also mentioned in my comment above, one of the added sources does not mention "Adventure Quest" at all (and that article, as pointed out by HighKing, is labeled as a PR piece), and one only has brief coverage. That leaves only one piece of in-depth coverage, which does not demonstrate notability. As suggested by Piotrus, if there is a broader list or article that someone can suggest for this to be merged or redirected to, I would be on board, but this does not meet the criteria of sustaining an independent article. Rorshacma (talk) 16:01, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not pass the WP:GNG due to the sources not being of sufficient quality or detail, per User:Rorshacma. Also not opposed to a redirect. Jontesta (talk) 23:58, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:43, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Pamzeis (talk) 08:49, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, fails WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:GNG. Devonian Wombat (talk) 22:34, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all the coverage is local and vaguely promotional, I agree with Rorshacma's description of the sourcing. There are many, many, many summer camps for children discussed in local newspapers as local activities (public interest-like coverage), this level of local coverage doesn't make them notable. power~enwiki (π, ν) 05:25, 15 November 2020 (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.