Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Squelchies

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 of the debate was delete. Johnleemk | Talk 15:53, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Squelchies[edit]

This is a non-notable online game. Wh e re ^(talk) 22:37, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This isn't really of sufficient importance to warrant inclusion. The article looks nice though - hopefully User:BioTube will contribute some more. Politepunk 23:43, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-notable webgame. Stifle 20:44, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: BioTube (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log) removed the AFD notice from this article in this edit. Stifle 20:44, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I removed it because the article is just fine. I include a new template to explain my reason. Check the top of the page. BioTube
Delete Whether a subject is notable and verifiable does not depend on how many other wikipedia articles link to it. If this was a notable web game (e.g. had been written up in a computer mag for use of new technology, or is verifiably the first or most something) it would be notable period. Thatcher131 22:05, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Leave it: The article expands on an otherwise ambiguous list. Therefore, there is no reason to delete it other than personal vendetta. BioTube
Comment: As a side note, the "policy" this article is proposed for deletion under is not official, only proposed. BioTube 20:02, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is true. However, it has been a de-facto standard for quite a bit. If we included an article on every little thing, it would be harder to maintain article quality. If you would like to discuss why you think the article should be included, please state your reasoning. Wh e re ^(talk) 23:56, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Game names mean little. Without a description, nothing can be concluded from the name. Since one game on the same list had an article(Lottso!), I believed it acceptable to start one for another two(Squelchies and PoppaZoppa(which I notice is not up for deletion)). Unless you want all three of the game articles deleted, do not target any of them. BioTube 01:20, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that game names mean little without a description, so perhaps it would be a good idea to shorten the list to just a couple of games, or just to add a short one sentence description after each game. I'm not sure. I think it would actually be a good idea to put the other non-notable games up for deletion, but that we should wait for this debate to finish first. Wh e re ^(talk) 20:49, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For most games a one line description should do. We'll have to wait and see if others require a larger one. BioTube 22:40, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into main article about website and Delete. -- infinity0 15:28, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD is being relisted to generate a clearer consensus. Please add new discussion below this notice. Thanks!
kingboyk 13:40, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I don't see any evidence of encyclopedia-level notability. --Ed (Edgar181) 14:03, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with the list(Pogo.com). BioTube 17:25, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nn. Eivind ^t ^@^c 18:30, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Impossible to have articles on every little online game found somewhere, so unless this is a particularly noteworthy one (article does not indicate this is the case), it should go. Henning Makholm 23:31, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. nn webgame Deizio 01:30, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, webcruft. Catamorphism 03:43, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as NN game. OhNo itsJamie ^Talk 23:13, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. --Khoikhoi 04:12, 25 March 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.