Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lucas the game

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 moved to draft at Draft:Lucas the Game by Czar as not ready for mainspace. JohnCD (talk) 10:53, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lucas the game[edit]

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

Poorly-sourced article about a non-notable video game. I am unable to find any reliable sources that discuss the product in any detail. Fails WP:GNG. - Mr X 12:07, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The game appears to have picked up a muted reaction, and I feel inclined to just delete the article as well. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 12:15, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete – Qualifies for speedy deletion under WP:G4, the article was already deleted: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lucas the Game. The only thing that has been added here is a IGN user review which is not a reliable source. --The1337gamer (talk) 12:18, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No reliable sources to establish notability. Search hits either comes as primary sources and routinal reports, or that it is split as "Lucas/the game". This is notwithstanding 1337's rationale to G4. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 13:04, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

--DCRichHistory (talk) 23:59, 26 September 2015 (UTC) This article should not be deleted, which I will attempt to justify. Several key points need to be made, regarding this issue. The1337gamer is listed on Valve/Steam editor list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Valve - Valve is abusing their resources/power to monopolize the game industry, which can be seen repeatedly if you study wiki logs. The1337gamer is the primary user behind the previous deletion and the attempt to delete this article, which has been greatly improved upon. Further, this article has a substantial percentage of new and notable information, which can be read (and viewed in bytes) from the previously deleted version. Further, it has several new reliable external sources in the game industry, which is all this article actually needs to suffice. IGN coverage is very much a credible source in the game industry. Also, Groupees is another notable and reliable instance of coverage of Lucas the Game. A test came up with a great deal of backlinks leading to the official site of this game, as well. The game also has a dedicated soundtrack by a professional musician/media company, along with official announcements surrounding its development and release. It has been proven, Lucas the Game is notable, and well enough sourced, including reliable external sourcing, to be elgible to exist. It should be given no less than leniency, as it has clearly met the minimum of criteria, and will likely further be enhanced by users.[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.