Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mineplex (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 keep. Tone 08:22, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mineplex (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 is very WP:MILL. Many other servers just like Mineplex (such as CubeCraft) exist, and none get their own articles. It has been briefly mentioned in some articles, but it is not enough to reach WP:GNG. It was previously nominated in 2017, and was merged to the article on Minecraft servers. Since then, it has been recreated. The notability has not changed since then. Either delete or redirect this article. I-82-I | TALK 02:36, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. I-82-I | TALK 02:36, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I disagree on the WP:MILL point, which I read as saying it is a run of the mill Minecraft server. It has held a Guinness World Record for number of concurrent players, is one of the four servers that is officially partnered with the game developer Mojang, and is one of the oldest still-running servers. The coverage related to the Dallas Mavericks partnership is far more than a brief mention, and is in multiple different sources. More coverage: [1] [2] (the latter is just to go against WP:MILL and not to show notability). Leijurv (talk) 02:56, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The sources provided by Leijurv indicate notability, and here's another one: [3]. I think the "exploitation" article is particularly interesting and should be added to the article to balance the current mildly promotional tone. Sam-2727 (talk) 23:09, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, the sources found clearly indicate that this topic passes WP:GNG. Nomination rationale is mostly WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST. Devonian Wombat (talk) 13:40, 23 August 2020 (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.