Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SmashBoards

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 no consensus. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 14:04, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SmashBoards

SmashBoards (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)

Fails WP:WEB, the only independent sources are a mention by Kotaku when a bunch of sites were DDoS'd[1] and mention on 1UP that someone got feedback from there. There is gytnews but cannot check that as the website is dead.[2] The rest of the sources are unreliable or affiliated with subject. Vaypertrail (talk) 13:07, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. --Non-Dropframe _talk 16:08, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 20:24, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, tons of sources included in the article including additional sources not added Tech Times, Cinemablend, Kotaku, and WDC. I was the person who previously noamintaed Smashboards for deletion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Smashboards, but the article has since been expanded with appropriate sources. Valoem ^{talk contrib} 06:32, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  Where are these "tons of sources"? All the sources you provided here are one off mentions. WDC is just a Q&A with three fans of the game, and not actually about the website.--Vaypertrail (talk) 06:54, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't find the NP reference to be affiliated with the subject. That aside, this is what the article looks like trimmed just to the RS which I believe talk about the article-proper. (I can't evaluate further since I'm at work which blocks some of the websites.) Probably the best solution is to start a section on the Smash eco-system in Super Smash Bros. or to add some of this content to #Competitive play there. Consider this a merge !vote.See the below-the-relist for evaluation. --Izno (talk) 16:50, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Reviewing the MLG article, I believe the two paragraphs therein and alone suffice to establish notability per WP:GNG #1.

  The GYTNews source at archive.org talks about a news event and only tangentially relates; it could be useful for a different article. I don't have the NP source to hand; someone at WP:VG may have access. Given my initial assertion, I would say that this meets the notability guidelines. This a weak keep with no prejudice for or against a merge of the content elsewhere in a later discussion. --Izno (talk) 16:18, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  Significant coverage entails multiple reliable sources, not just two paragraphs in one – czar 17:16, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  I was very careful to verify what the GNG says on that point. From the WP:GNG, bullet 3: There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected.[3] In other words, there is no requirement for multiple sources. Are the two paragraphs enough? I think so. Why? They clearly establish the notability of the website, specifically Little did the founder of Smash World know that his website would blow up into one of the biggest and most dedicated independent competitive gaming communities in the world. A reputable source has clearly published their evaluation of the site as being notable. --Izno (talk) 18:52, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm not sure you'll find much sympathy on AfD for keeping an article based on two paragraphs, is all. I think the line you quoted is aimed more at book-length treatment and surely isn't a popular sentiment at AfD. Depth of coverage requires more than a few blurbs. Nothing else to add, just wanted to address that one point – czar 21:04, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  Sure, but the two paras was the basis for the weak part of the keep. --Izno (talk) 01:52, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  A review of the above sources from Valoem is interesting. I would discount three of those sites, namely not the Kotaku review. A brief search of kotaku.com for Smashboards seems to indicate that there is regular referencing and coverage of what people are saying on the site. I'm not immediately certain that all of them are/aren't blogs, so someone might want to poke into that. --Izno (talk) 18:52, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  Brief breeze thru seems to confirm initial suspicions that all are one-off mentions (and a number in the comments), besides the first few which are part of the article's text proper. --Izno (talk) 18:59, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  This is a neat article from the WP:VG/RS Google custom search. Probably more appropriate for the competitive article which is also being AFDd. --Izno (talk) 19:12, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - I'm not seeing any reliable sources that are discussing the subject (Smashboards, not Smash Bros, its glitches, or these other things) in significant detail. I'm fine with a merge/redirect if some sort of article or subsection is created about the game's competitive scene, but not really with a standalone article like this, unless some better sources are presented... Sergecross73 msg me 16:12, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep well documented by secondary sources. Also, I'd like too point out that there used to be a lot of mentions the MLG website that have been lost as MLG has periodically deleted some of the content from its website.--Prisencolinensinainciusol (talk) 21:30, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Where? Can you supply some of these sources that cover the subject in significant detail? Sergecross73 msg me 03:15, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• This one discusses the website in detail. This one discusses the founding and history albeit briefly. There are over 100 additional sources which give minor coverage as well such this one "When it launched with the 1.1.0 update, people on the influential Smash Boards forum and the Smash Bros. subreddit recoiled". Valoem ^{talk contrib} 05:14, 27 August 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.