Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Acrojet
Source: 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 keep. John254 17:59, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Acrojet
- Acrojet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Was speedy delete, never deleted. I don't think it should be deleted, but someone did. Just wanted to give it a fair trial. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 12:48, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. MrKIA11 (talk) 12:57, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Neutral. I "prod"ed this article as I did not believe it asserted notability (see WP:NOTE). I'm still not sure it does. Frecklefoot makes a fairly good argument, though, that pretty much any MicroProse game is sufficiently notable. :) Had Frecklefoot simply removed the prod based on his or her own opinion, I would not have contested it. I'm not voting to keep because, as already noted, I still don't think the article meets WP:NOTE. --Yamla (talk) 13:34, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, I don't believe this should be deleted as it is pertinent to the history of flight simulation software.64.128.73.42 (talk) 13:38, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep, it needs expanding, but I can see it being notable. --Julesn84 (talk) 16:14, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I can see why it was speedy-tagged and why it was brought here, but a cursory glance on google reveals it was reviewed in Zzap magazine and was ported to Amstrad CPC, MSX and Spectrum [1]. It was reviewed in Crash issue 37 [2], Amstrad Action reviewed it according to this. So we've got a game covered by at least these (there are almost certainly more) from a notable developer and an early example of a pretty small genre. I'd say it's fine as a WIP. Someoneanother 21:32, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - links from Someoneanother adequately point to notability being asserted. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 04:00, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep meets WP:N, has WP:RS Gary King (talk) 19:56, 24 April 2008 (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.