Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pyst

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. John254 01:06, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pyst[edit]

Contested Prod. This game is already mentioned in the Parodies and fan games section of the Myst article - I really don't think there's any need for detail any greater than that already given. The article asserts little notability. _TheIslander 19:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The only sources I could find were short reviews, which don't amount to substantial coverage. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 19:32, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The game had an actual retail release, unlike the various fanmade homages listed in Myst#Parodies and fan games. Most of the coverage at the time (mid-to-late 1996) was in print magazines like Computer Games Strategy Plus, and is for the most part unavailable to an online search. -Sean Curtin (talk) 03:23, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. Someone another (talk) 05:55, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I remember this game and found loads of references on LexisNexis. I integrated some of the references into the article and expanded it a little; please take another look. It certainly meets our notability standards, especially given its Firesign pedigree and appearance of John Goodman. — brighterorange (talk) 14:42, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Commercial release, two notable people involved, and, besides, I actually remember hearing about this back in the day. --Adamrush (talk) 18:43, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep there's sources in the article and a couple more here EW.com / salon.com, due to being published in '96 most of the sources will be offline, but there's enough to sustain an article. The info in Myst does not cover what could be wrung out of the sources above and already in the article - particularly reception. The other games listed in that section are via external links and should be deleted or turned into articles. Someone another (talk) 23:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it's pretty safe to say that actually commercially released and widely distributed games are notable enough, even more so if sources agree. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 11:13, 10 January 2008 (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.