Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cluedo chronology

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:10, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cluedo chronology[edit]

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

Is this encyclopedic? Tagged for cleanup since 2007. RJFJR (talk) 17:15, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as non-notable. Cusop Dingle (talk) 17:33, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I suppose it's interesting, but looks like a whole bunch of original research to me. —Al E.^(talk) 17:38, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:50, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete what's not original research is undoubtedly not notable plot only description. OSborn^arf_contribs. 19:55, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- Seems to consist of mainly Original Research. And while the game itself is notable, there's a lack of sources that would help to indicate that these intricate plot details have any sort of independent notability. Rorshacma (talk) 22:40, 13 April 2012 (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.