Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Game-Debate
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 delete. Though sources have been added, none of those are independent. Even if they were from partners, they're still not independent. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 20:01, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Game-Debate
- Game-Debate (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No indication of notability, does not seem to meet WP:GNG. CharlieEchoTango (contact) 07:09, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I see no notability, no references, no information, beyond "in the top 20k of Alexa". If that was notable, this would be Adverpedia, not Wikipedia. St John Chrysostom view/my bias 12:02, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete I can't find any indication of coverage in independent, reliable sources. Fails WP:GNG and WP:WEB. Yunshui 雲水 20:40, 28 January 2012 (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) 00:21, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:23, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Don't Delete. We are still adding information. We added new information today. Your words are harsh my friends. Pip 14:05, 01 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment New sources are all directly from Game-Debate, hence useless for WP:GNG which requires independent sources to demonstrate notability. Not harsh, just policy-based. Yunshui 雲水 14:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Well I have been trying to contact some of our partners but it's hard for them to create a page just to give us credibility so in the end some references have to come from the own website. What I was trying to say is that we are still building the page. It takes time. Oh and I have been looking at some pages (won't mention the names) without any external references and they don't seem to have this problem. Instead of just saying 'DELETE, DELETE, DELETE' it would be nice to get some help and advice. Pip 14:05, 02 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment New sources are all directly from Game-Debate, hence useless for WP:GNG which requires independent sources to demonstrate notability. Not harsh, just policy-based. Yunshui 雲水 14:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Don't Delete. We are still adding information. We added new information today. Your words are harsh my friends. Pip 14:05, 01 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete not notable. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:48, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - No independent sources are provided, so there is no evidence of notability. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 20:27, 5 February 2012 (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.