Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Personal Nightmare

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. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 15:24, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Personal Nightmare[edit]

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

Only reference is to MobyGames. A web search turns up only references on game download sites, wikis, blogs, etc. Cannot find any secondary coverage. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 17:58, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There does not appear to be an official website related to the game. I shall try to find reception scores and reviews that qualify. Give a week or two and you need not delete the article. Deltasim (talk) 18:05, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

AfD allows at least 7 days for discussion, and articles can be relisted to extend the discussion. As far as I understand it, no article in AfD is deleted during this time unless it meets CSD. If you need more time, you can always move it to user space and then back when you find sources to support it.--Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:20, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Magazine reviews have been added. Is there any other evidence you require me to find? Deltasim (talk) 18:46, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 00:38, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. A quick Google search shows it should easily pass WP:NGAMES. The "autocomplete" knew I was referring to the video game when I was halfway through typing the second word... with results like "game," "walkthrough," "cheats," etc. I feel this at the least proves some extent of popularity. The other three games in the Elvira series also all have their own WP articles. Searching news archives does not yield much, but given it's age and the genericness of the name I'd imagine that'd be the case, e.g. you'll find sports games that were described as some athlete's "personal nightmare." I think this article merely needs more references added, as finding them doesn't seem to be a problem. Beyond that I see nothing qualifying WP:DEL-REASON. — MusikAnimal ^talk 22:07, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, notability established by the new sources in the article plus the ones at MobyGames. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 14:38, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:27, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep not the most notable thing ever but appears to have been widely reviewed in its day. I don't quite see why the article doesn't mention Elvira when the MG page makes it really clear this is an Elvira game. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 02:28, 17 November 2013 (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.