Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heli Attack 3

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. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:06, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Heli Attack 3[edit]

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

Article topic lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. (?) It had no meaningful hits in a video game reliable sources custom Google search (Gamezone hit was a repackaged press release and the other stuff was just listings and PR). JIG review is a paragraph long and the rest are unreliable sources. There are no worthwhile redirect targets. If someone finds more (non-English and offline) sources, please {{ping}} me. – czar 02:20, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. -- Eclipsed (talk) (email) 07:50, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. I note that the parent company squarecircleco doesn't even have it's own page (although maybe they could?). shoy (reactions) 18:09, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note of previous discussion - An AfD for Heli Attack (series) resulted in a merge into Heli Attack 3 which was deemed the only notable game. AfD discussion here. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 13:42, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 18:23, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:23, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:34, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:18, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I agree that notability hasn't been clearly established. The links in the articles right now seem to go to unreliable sources. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 06:54, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - searches didn't turn up anything which would show the notability of this. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:03, 9 September 2015 (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.