Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Visual Novel Database

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. Jenks24 (talk) 11:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Visual Novel Database

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

Non-notable website. Fulfills speedy deletion criteria A7. No indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events). Was previously speedied by Eeekster, but DGG removed it. I left a message on DGG's talk page and proposed deletion but apparently that's not allowed because "Deletion of the article has already been contested by the declining of the speedy deletion". DGG has failed to adequately explain why it shouldn't be deleted. --Atlantima (talk) 01:18, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Atlantima (talk) 01:45, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) Atlantima (talk) 01:45, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete per CSD A7: "An article about... web content... that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant". In my opinion, DGG erred in declining the CSD. I am unable to find any reliable sources with which to establish notability per WP:WEBCRIT. - MrX 01:54, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I declined the speedy because I thought a db of such proportions was a reasonable indication of importance. It was then placed on Prod, and I was quite aware of it but did not remove it, for I was unable to find acceptable sources. I declined to remove the prod, someone else removed it, thinking the speedy being declined prevented the subsequent prod, which is not the case. I don't think the nom meant to suggest it was myself, for the sequence is clear enough in the article history. The point of speedy a7 is to remove articles which are so obviously unimportant that it is absurd to even look for sources. I've deleted thousands of such articles. I've also removed speedy tags for things that might be s/n if they can be sourced; some are, some aren't but if I want the community to have a chance at it, I remove the speedy tag. DGG ( talk ) 02:11, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thanks for the clarification. - Mr X 02:42, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete DGG was right to decline the speedy; VNDB seems to be the dominant English language database for this type of game. Wikipedia has a template for VNDB, see Template:Vndb, so someone considers it a useful source. I found many mentions of VNDB in potentially reliable sources, e.g., [1], but always as references for the novels being discussed, never as the main subject of a news article itself. No in-depth reliable sources suggest that this topic fails general notability guidelines. The article should be deleted, but with no prejudice to re-creation when secondary sources become available. --Mark viking (talk) 05:02, 7 March 2013 (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.