Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aeropause Games

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. Davewild (talk) 18:25, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Aeropause Games

Aeropause Games (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

This website has no significant coverage from multiple reliable, independent sources. (?) Not the subject of any dedicated work that I could find. Only the subject of a series of passing mentions about its reporting, though hasn't won an award or been covered in any substantial manner. Third party refs in the article are not about Aeropause itself. Fails the general notability guideline and WP:WEBCRIT. – czar 03:27, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, unfortunately as the need for better sources has not been addressed nor have they received any attention at all. My searches only found passing mentions here. SwisterTwister talk 14:53, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 16:52, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:52, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, as above. Also, the referenced video game blog appears to be dead, and has now become a book review blog. Kage Acheron (talk) 23:58, 29 May 2015 (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.