Talk:FS Passengers
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| Stub | This article has been rated as stub-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| Low | This article is on a subject of low priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0. | |
|
VG To-do:
|
||
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on 25 May 2008. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
[edit] Proposed Deletion
I have proposed deletion of this article on the following grounds:
- It promotes a commerical product
- It has no references to media or other independent sources
- It has no references to satisfy notability guidelines
- I do not believe it could be rewritten to meet standards of a wikipedia article
Icemotoboy (talk) 06:17, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
- Well it's really hard to get independent source since the notability of that independent source must also be established, and with such a diverse community there aren't really many independent sources that are truly established. Even major site like [1] looks very amateur in its page design, although it holds one of the largest library of addons. Here is a review of the product but as the notability of simFlight.com itself isn't established I didn't add it as reference. There are 2 more quotes from reviews as per [2] but one is from a commercial magazine which I do not have access to, and another which seems hardly reliable. It is still the 5th best selling addon on simMarket even though it's been years since it came out,
- Also, there is nothing wrong in promoting commercial products, and IMHO it sounding like advertising is not a valid deletion rationale as that can be improved upon (in fact I don't think it's written like an advertisement at all, but that's just my opinion). Even though I am perfectly fine with deleting this article if it really doesn't meet notability guidelines but I would like to hear some more opinions on this first. --antilivedT | C | G 06:01, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
- I made four points regarding deletion, as you noted simply being a commercial product is not (in itself) a valid reason for deletion. I was the combination of these four points, particulary the notability, that led me to believe the article was not salvageable. I believe the article, like many of the FlightSim addon articles we have seen appear on wikipedia, does not meet notability guidelines. If it is really hard to find independent sources confirming the notability, then surely that is a good example that the article is not notable. Perhaps we would be better served by one article on Flight Sim Addons that describes what they are, the history behind their rise in popularity and development, the business models used, and so on. I think small articles such as this about articles that are not clearly notable and verifiable by third parties lower the quality of our historic record of Flight Simulation. I'd be more than happy to begin the process of creating one "Flight Simulation Addons" page and (without specifically describing individual addons) provide an explaination of the points I described above. What do you think? Icemotoboy (talk) 21:20, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
- Good work on finding that link to the top selling products, however I am concerned it will be subject to a high probability of link death (for example, its location as a product selling at the website will be subject to change at any time). We need to find mention of this product in at least one thirty party, independent, publication or source. I believe if we can't find that, then the article should be deleted. Icemotoboy (talk) 21:25, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
