Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Sims 3 (second 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 Delete. Aksi_great (talk) 10:14, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Sims 3[edit]

Wow, I don't even really think this has been really verified at all. the only "source" is when an EA exec simply mentioned it in a single sentence in an article talking about something else. Many speculation if you ask me. WP is not a crystal ball. By the way, 26,200,000 Google hits, for some reason an extremely large amount of them being Sims 2 or general Sims not "The Sims 3", and the TS3 stuff is fan speculation. Red Pooka 03:49, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Speculative at this point, search with quotes [1] returns far fewer results. Only a vague rumour to go on. "In development" could really mean anything, and until we start seeing press releases, this doesn't need an article. --Crossmr 03:51, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as crystalballery. --Dennisthe2 04:08, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:CRYSTAL.--Hús ö nd 04:26, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Could use some sources but this title is coming according to the budgeting so it does warrant a article and IMO does not fall under crystal ball status - Mike Beckham 04:28, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. - Mig ^(Talk) 04:56, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:CRYSTAL JPG-GR 05:09, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. MER-C 05:11, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — Delete per nom. –- kungming·2 ^(Talk) | Review 07:44, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, one simple hint that the game is to be released is not enough to merit its own article, yet. Keep deleted until, like comments outlined in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SimCity 5 (working title), reliable and more detailed information about Sims 3 comes out. The way I see it, that probably won't happen in the near future in this case, allowing unverifiable speculation to move in the interval. This is not an article worth keeping for now. ╫ ２５ ^{◀RingADing▶} 10:15, 24 November 2006 (UTC) ╫[reply]
Delete. Per above, unless this game title is confirmed. Michaelas10 (Talk) 13:31, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep We can just add info as it comes. Maybe lock the article up, when a press release is released open it back up for edits. Bettyfizzw 15:12, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
comment as I pointed out on The Sims 2: Life Stories AFD, this isn't proper procedure for handling an article. Locking is only to be used in the case of persistent edit warring or vandalism.--Crossmr 17:30, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Far too early to create an article at this point, see WP:CRYSTAL.-- danntm ^T _C 20:53, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete speculation. Rever e ndG 22:36, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Reverend. Plus, looking back at the first Sims game, a Sims 3 is likely not to appear for about ten years and seven or so Sims 2 expansions.--Kross ^Talk 03:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. SYSS Mouse 03:18, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. A little bit related: what about The Sims for Wii (separate from The sims 3 required due to potential Mii support), there is already a website up. [2] SYSS Mouse 03:18, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete this is quite far in the future in gaming terms and could turn out as vapourware. Even though it's likely that Maxis will continue with their highly successful franchise, we should only really start working on a game-in-development article when we've at least got more proof (preferably in the form of the existence of an alpha or beta build). Even though I'm usually an inclusionist, I think this is simply too early for an article --Rambutaan 01:17, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --FreshFruitsRule 02:40, 27 November 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.