Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ZSNES

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:31, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ZSNES

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Was mentioned in the discussion of VisualBoyAdvance and this article also fails GNG as well. The Ars Technica article is just a trivial mention and the article has lacked WP:SIGCOV since its 2003 inception. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:56, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Computing, and Software. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:56, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning keep Searching for a few sources, submitting some for evaluation:
- Lifehacker: "ZSNES is the other big SNES emulator out there, and once upon a time was the go-to. These days, though, it’s considered old, outdated, and inaccurate—though it’s also said to have the lowest input lag of the bunch. Unfortunately, that comes with crackling sound issues, and significant bugs in some games." Tells some detail about ZSNES itself, namely that it has low input lag and crackling audio, also about its reception over time
- PC Mag (Feb. 2007): Mentions it being open-source, and its "best feature: two-player gaming over the Net. ZSNES can use hardware-accelerated graphics cards, so some games actually look better than they did on the original console."

— Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 02:52, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I think the ideal outcome would be to merge this to something like Super Nintendo emulation. Unfortunately, that article doesn't exist...although it certainly could given the amount that's been written about it (in RS even), often comparing and contrasting specific emulators. And frankly, the other SNES emulators which have standalone articles could stand to be merged in as well. But, of course, someone has to do all of that. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:46, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that such a page would be pretty worthwhile. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 16:34, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you're interested, this concept exists in Wikibooks, albiet in stub form wikibooks:Emulation/SNES. Mbrickn (talk) 16:41, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, sources like Retro Gamer and Ars Technica establish notability. The latter is not a trivial mention, as the article explicitly compares ZSNES to bsnes (now known as higan (emulator)). Axem Titanium (talk) 01:23, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In addition to the sources Mellohi! found, there's also a pretty significant mention in GROUP TEST. By: Hayward, David, Micro Mart, 14730251, Jul2013, Issue 1267, with ~7 paragraphs about it: ZSNES is by far the most unpleasant-looking emulator in this group, but what it lacks in beauty it makes up for with a simple, uncluttered, interface and superb quality, with its ability to emulate the more complicated and complex SNES hardware features, such as the SuperFX co-processor chip ... . There are also some other excellent features ... . Skynxnex (talk) 19:21, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent job finding that in-depth Micro Mart review, Skynxnex! — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 19:53, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sources mentioned by other editors (PC Mag and Ars Technica) are sufficient for notability. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 18:37, 23 September 2022 (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.