Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stellar Crisis
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 delete. MBisanz talk 02:53, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Stellar Crisis[edit]
- Stellar Crisis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
No multiple reliable sources indicating notability, delete as per WP:WEB. Peephole (talk) 00:24, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - it would be nice to know how extensive the PC Gamer review was. The article doesn't say if it was the UK or US edition, but I've left a message for an editor through the VG project's magazine dept. Marasmusine (talk) 01:09, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Fails WP:Note. Even if the PC Gamer review is more than cursory, we should aim for multiple sources to establish notability. Wyatt Riot (talk) 03:17, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete fails WP:WEB.ZappyGun (talk to me)What I've done for Wikipedia 14:59, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:32, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - It's and old game, so it's feasable that the game was covered more at that time. However, in those days the coverage was more likely to be in print magazines or in websites that are now defunct. SharkD (talk) 18:27, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I tried doing a search on the Wayback Machine and findarticles.com without results, though I'm not entirely sure how the search engine works. SharkD (talk) 18:32, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: Fails WP:WEB. Schuym1 (talk) 21:52, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep If this indeed is the first web based online game then it should have an article. Being from 1993 it doesn't surprise me that sources are hard to come by. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:39, 28 January 2009 (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.