Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Renegade X (2nd nomination)

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. (non-admin closure) —UY Scuti ^Talk 19:11, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Renegade X[edit]

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

This article is for an unreleased fanmade game that has no merit other than to promote itself. It should not have a Wikipedia article for it since it's not important at all. Brend0 (talk) 21:38, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article documents 1 released game, 1 released mod, and 1 upcoming game this is publicly released as a beta which many people do in fact play. There is plenty of merit and importance to the article (though it could use some expansion), especially since it briefly documents both released and actively developed games. Disclaimer that I've sunk thousands of hours into this game as both a player and a developer. --AgentJess (talk) 01:53, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:34, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - article clearly provides (and I bet I can identify others) reliable secondary sources treating the work significantly, meaning this topic is notable. Noms argument has no merit in Wikipedia policy. --Izno (talk) 10:52, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Covered by numerous reliable sources, including [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]. This definitely meets notability. Its importance should not be take into consideration when it comes to deleting articles. (There are a lot of useless but notable stuff in the world) AdrianGamer (talk) 11:21, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I think there's room for a merge discussion here, but outright deletion is off the table thanks to the coverage highlighted above. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:28, 11 September 2016 (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.