Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rivaled Fate

From 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. Jaranda wat's sup 15:06, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rivaled Fate

Rivaled Fate (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) - (View log)

A webgame with issues surrounding reliable sources and verifiability. Doesn't appear to meet WP:WEB. Google hasn't turned up any reliable sources. Wafulz 04:52, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete Typical non notable game. All souces reach back to itself etc. fails WP:WEB--155.144.251.120 05:17, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Currently one of the most pioneering browser based games on the internet, featured in a local paper in 2005, no online references available for that. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.29.210.71 (talk) 14:14, 19 January 2007 (UTC).
  • Can you give us the name and date and page of the local paper? If someone from the region can go to a public library and look it up, that would be one verifiable source. Note that WP:V requires multiple independent sources, though. Neutral pending any evidence that other reliable sources have published enough about this being "most pioneering". Browser-based games rarely get enough fact-checked coverage to meet WP's policy. Barno 04:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
  • A local paper doesn't always cut it either. Plenty of my friends have been described and praised in local papers and they certainly don't merit articles. --Wafulz 05:01, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep I've added some links. There are a few more out there, including personal guild pages and wiki internal references, but I'm on lunch break. I'll try and mobilize r-fate's user base to contribute to this article in a non-biased, non-meatpuppet way. Fatprincess 17:45, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - No reliable sources to show it meets WP:WEB RyanPostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 17:26, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, —Wknight94 (talk) 17:59, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:WEB unless evidence of third-party coverage can be demonstrated. Walton monarchist89 19:30, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per 155.144.251.120. JuJube 00:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. John Vandenberg 15:21, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep I've added some links. There are a few more out there, including personal guild pages, but I'm on lunch break. I'll try and mobilize r-fate's user base to contribute to this article in a non-biased, non-meatpuppet way.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Fatprincess (talk • contribs)
    • This is not speedy keep criteria, please have a read through WP:SK. Also, the sources provided are trivial- they are user-submitted, and don't even give any information. Personal websites do not count as reliable sources. --Wafulz 17:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
    • I'll try and mobilize r-fate's user base to contribute to this article in a non-biased, non-meatpuppet way. Useless. Unhelpful. Nonproductivish. Ineffectivoid. JuJube 07:27, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
      • Please don't bite. --Wafulz 16:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Clear Delete doe not meet WP:WEB criteria and sources are non-reliable and/or trivial. Eluchil404 14:38, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
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.