Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Game Market

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 Keep. This has had three weeks and while the arguments for keeping are not strong, there have been no opinions expressed in favour of deletion other than the nominator's. Michig (talk) 07:48, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Game Market[edit]

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

Nothing much to indicate notability, prod declined for the possibility of future notability Jac16888 ^Talk 17:27, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk to me 19:58, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk to me 19:59, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:37, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Obviously the English is pretty poor, which doesn't help. But the Japanese version of the page has a lot more sources. I can't judge the quality of those sources, but noting their existence and hoping they are useful. Looking at [1] (which isn't a reliable source), this is large enough I'd expect reasonable sources. Similar things in the US that hit 1000 people generally will have the needed coverage to meet the GNG. At 5000 this probably does. We need someone who is good at finding Japanese sources. Hobit (talk) 05:14, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Soft Keep Seconding Hobit - the condition for wp:N isn't that Wikipedia has the sources, it's that they must exist. Something with 5000 guests and that's been running for a dozen years is almost certainly notable - it's just that all the sources are in Japanese. Therefore I can't find them or read them. Neonchameleon (talk) 12:55, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:17, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:12, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I have reworked the lead of the article, and will continue fixing the rest. The Japanese page is light on reliable sources, but there I found some by doing a quick search (and used one of them in the lead). I am confident there is enough to establish notability. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 15:00, 22 December 2014 (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.