Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cattle and Crops

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. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:11, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cattle and Crops[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG. Unreleased game that is not subject to significant coverage from reliable independents sources yet. The1337gamer (talk) 09:00, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. The1337gamer (talk) 09:00, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, but be open to restoring because they just launched a Kickstarter crowdfunding campaign which appears to be going well so far.[1]Knox490 (talk) 09:57, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - There may well be something notable about this game in the future, but at the moment it is primarily an advertisement for the game's proposed features. Clawsyclaw (talk) 10:35, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 11:53, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - but update when news/info available. As the game is still being developed and soon will be released in Early Access [2] This page will be updated with all the news/information needed to keep the page up and running. All the information will be added from Cattle And Crops. [3] Joe Parkinson (talk) 14:22, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand your reasoning for keeping the article. You haven't addressed the point I raised: the topic lacks notability. We don't create Wikipedia articles on any game simply because it exists. The game has almost no coverage from reliable independent sources at moment. The developer's own website does not establish notability, it's a primary source. There's no guarantee the article will receive enough coverage to meet WP:GNG in the future either. Articles should not be created unless they meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Clearly it is too soon for an article. --The1337gamer (talk) 14:30, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your point the game will be soon released in Early Access. It already has some coverage from other websites and sources. [4] And I'm very certain when the game soon is released as Early Access there will be more coverage of the game [5]. The other communities have already taken an interest with the game [6] and the farming community out there already have hered about the game just needs to be released. [7] Joe Parkinson (talk) 14:38, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Coverage on internet forums is irrelevant and has no bearing on the topic's notability. I read the Rock, Paper, Shotgun article before nominating for deletion. Cattle and Crops isn't the primary focus of the article and the section on it is short. There's not enough there to establish notability. If the topic receives significant coverage from reliable independent sources, then an article can be created. Not before, with the hope that some day coverage might appear. --The1337gamer (talk) 14:48, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. And the page here is short due to the limited information about the game expect their website with tons of information. Like I said hopefully soon when the game is released in Early Access it can be recreated when it has more notability and independent sources for the game. So if you do, you can delete the article. Hopefully soon we'll be given more information and more notability for the game. Joe Parkinson (talk) 14:53, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The developers are a small German team. There're some notable German sites out there with reviews/opinions and details about the game as well as there're ones in French also. The game is soon to be released and maybe it was to soon to create the article. So maybe delete the article can be a good idea, but as stated above to be recreated/restored in the future. The potential of the game and possible increase in notability and more review sites. The crowdfunding it still going strong too. [8] Hjc01 (talk) 18:11, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete GNG not met. SPA vote doesn't exactly fill me with confidence about the motives of the article's creator. Exemplo347 (talk) 21:02, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails the meet WP:GNG, a forum website is not a reliable source. The article lacks third-party and independent sources to establish notability. TheDeviantPro (talk) 23:34, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The sources do not presently exist for this video game, meaning it's not notable now. If there's a reasonable belief that it will be notable, it should be moved to draft space. If there is no such reasonable belief, it should be deleted. --Izno (talk) 23:41, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkuser note: Hjc01 is a Confirmed sock puppet of Joe Parkinson. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Joe Parkinson.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:21, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Perhaps just a case of WP:TOOSOON at this point, but I don't see any significant reliable, independent sources on the subject currently. Also striking through the blocked users' comments. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 08:25, 17 April 2017 (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.