Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One Piece: Unlimited Adventure

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 consensus seems to be that the article needs improvement, not deletion. W.marsh 00:15, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One Piece: Unlimited Adventure[edit]

Crystal ball gazing of the first degree. Lets recreate when the game has been released and there is something to write an article about Spartaz 20:22, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, but it almost looks researched. If all it had was the name, I'd be more adamant. Niki Whimbrel 20:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletions. -- Eiwob 23:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it is a game from a well known series. It was also previously previewed by IGN [[1]]. I don't think crystalbalism applies here. Also there is no rule against creating enteries for unrleased games. --67.68.155.234 23:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Its totally unsourced and full of speculations and tags for adding stuff when information is available. Also see crystal ball gazing that says

Forward-looking articles about unreleased products (e.g. movies, games, etc.) require special care to make sure that they are not advertising.

There is no sourced content here - therefore its simply a placeholder and redundant. --Spartaz 06:26, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. It's not a good article at all, but I suspect most of the claims made in it can actually be sourced from previews etc., so it probably doesn't actually violate any inclusion policies.
The Wikipedia approach to substandard articles is to improve them, not to delete them. Therefore, before this is considered for deletion, it should be cleaned up by removing non-encyclopedic content and claims that genuinely cannot be verified from the multiple sources provded. Only then will it be clear whether there is actually any content here or not. If there turns out not to be any, then deletion can be considered, but as I said, I suspect it will turn out that most of the claims are verifiable. — Haeleth Talk 18:27, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep, showcased at E3 2006 and was confirmed in Sept. to be released accodring to IGN. Likely notable when released. -- Steve Hart 14:27, 10 December 2006 (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.