Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Irisu Syndrome

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. — Aitias // discussion 00:20, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Irisu Syndrome

Irisu Syndrome (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Article about a seemingly non-notable freeware game written in game guide style. Unreferenced and none of the external links can be used as RS references. Google shows lots of non-RS coverage (as might be expected for a downloadable game) making RS coverage hard to find. I couldn't see any. Article was previously deleted by PROD and then recreated by the same author. DanielRigal (talk) 23:39, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 01:01, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
• Delete. "The object of Irisu Syndrome is to achieve a high score." Duh!
  On a more serious note, even for a freeware game, reliable sources such as reviews should come up at the top of a Google search if the game is indeed notable. That is not happening here. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:25, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
  • I mean, near the top, right after primary sources. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:26, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 02:31, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

• Delete - I can't find any reliable sources either. The hits I found were mostly places to get the game, or people talking about it on forums. -- Pax85 (talk) 08:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
• Delete Even remaining mindful of the language barrier I've failed to find anything resembling a reliable source, and the pieces found in Japanese were small blog posts. Doesn't have the sources necessary to demonstrate notability and is not verified at this point in time. No prejudice against recreation/undeletion if sources are shown. Someoneanother 05:00, 19 February 2009 (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.