Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Castle Age (2nd 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. Staxringold _talk^contribs 13:54, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Castle Age

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

Delete. I can only repeat the comments made during this article's first deletion nomination two years ago. The subject is not notable and there is no sourcing of any kind. It is something that adds no value at all to the site. --Jack | ^{talk page} 18:04, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 18:13, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge it into Facebook if the game requires access to that website to play. That is if, and only if, it can be sourced by third party sources to show that it is notable in some way. Otherwise, I'm afriad there will be no other option, no other choice, no other way, no other decision, no other thing to do but...DELETE! Either way, it can't stay like this--^{The Legendary}_{Sky Attacker} 20:55, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Cybercobra (talk) 04:03, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong and Speedy Delete per nom. --Teancum (talk) 17:10, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete again. WP:WEB is a good place to start for why. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:05, 3 September 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.