Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dance Evolution

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The result was Withdrawn by nominator. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jéské Couriano (talk • contribs) 18:27, 11 June 2014

Dance Evolution

Dance Evolution (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Sources are all either to the game's developer or its official website. Sources aren't sufficient. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 06:59, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

• Keep There are sufficient sources out there to establish notability. See Metacritic for example.  Philg88 ^♦talk 08:43, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions.  Philg88 ^♦talk 08:44, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

• Keep I agree with Philg88. The link to Metacritic shows what reliable sources have reviewed it. Dream Focus 11:36, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 13:02, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

• Keep. Snow keep—these debates go by the sourcing that is available and not the current state of the article. There are reviews from almost every major video game journalism source (as listed at WP:VG/RS) including IGN, Game Informer, GameSpot, Eurogamer, OXM, GameZone, etc. Withdrawal recommended as snow keep czar ♔ 14:01, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

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.