Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Warhammer 40,000: Carnage

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The result was WITHDRAWN. Closing my own AFD since it is a procedural withdraw only. I feel there is still some room for debate as to which side of WP:GNG this falls on, but as there has been no support to delete and a great deal of effort to get it up to snuff, a withdrawal is the polite thing to do and doesn't hurt the encyclopedia. Dennis 2¢ 18:46, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Warhammer 40,000: Carnage[edit]

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

A summary, a press release, and two listings at Google play and Apple store. None of that establishes notability. Dennis 23:08, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 23:14, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 23:14, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still a bit new at this - could someone please specify how to make this entry notable? It has similar content and structure to Warhammer 40,000: Storm of Vengeance, Warhammer 40,000: Kill Team, and Warhammer 40,000: Fire Warrior. User talk:Ekimnam 16:33, 26 September 2014 (PT)

Wikipedia:Notability (video games) is worth a read. The overwhelming number of released games aren't "notable" by the standards here, only those that have significant coverage from outlets that aren't associated with the game or selling the game. From what I see, nothing is going to make it pass as it didn't look like has received significant coverage from independent sources. Dennis 23:42, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can add a section on Reception, and list the reviews out there and other mentions of the game from various independent sources. It has the same, if not more, independent coverage than Warhammer 40,000: Storm of Vengeance, Warhammer 40,000: Kill Team, and Warhammer 40,000: Fire Warrior. I can gather sources and list it. Notability is a very subjective notion, but if I were to measure it based on the other Video Games that are currently listed on Wikipedia, this game is far more notable (and has more independent sources) than many out there. It is my fault for not adding this at the first submission. User talk:Ekimnam 17:15, 26 September 2014 (PT)

It isn't personal, don't take it that way. We've all had articles at AFD, and yes I've had a couple deleted over the years. It is about process, not your worth as an individual. As for comparing to other articles, that really doesn't work, per WP:WAX. But it will be at AFD for a week, giving you a chance to update and then note it here. If I find the article clearly passes, I would withdraw, and others would vote to keep the article. I'm not personally invested in it being deleted, after all. Dennis 01:40, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I never took it personally, and strange to even bring up personal worth. I am merely defending the article and am requesting additional clarity and direction as the reasoning for deletion is vague - as stated I'm relatively new to this. I have added additional references and have included ones from WP:VG/RS. If this still doesn't meet criteria, I would be grateful for direction on what to do next.User talk:Ekimnam 18:39, 29 September 2014 (PT)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 13:42, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and trim: I've added a few sources that prove its notability (148apps, Slide To Play, and Pocket Gamer are all approved by WP:VG/RS), but there's a lot of cruft in the article. I don't want to accidentally throw the baby out with the bathwater by removing it all, but it's certainly excessive. Supernerd11 _{Firemind ^_^ Pokedex} 20:09, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've edited down some of the cruft - please do let me know if it should be edited down further! User talk:Ekimnam 18:39, 29 September 2014 (PT)

It looks much better now, thank you. Supernerd11 _{Firemind ^_^ Pokedex} 15:18, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: What I see now suggests notability, though it is not a strong case, and more cutting is needed. There doesn't seem to be any consensus to delete either.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 13:24, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @Dennis Brown, what do you think of the current version? Note that several of the reception sources (but not all) were vetted at WP:VG/RS czar ♔ 14:25, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:34, 4 October 2014 (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.