Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/4-in-1 Fun Pack


 * 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 as lacking sources that indicate notability. Aaron Brenneman (talk) 05:02, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

4-in-1 Fun Pack

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Contested PROD. I couldn't find any reliable sources proving anything about this game, and the ones provided are from GameFAQs - which is user-submitted - and MobyGames, which is considered unreliable. The game appears to be a straight port of four games that have doubtless been ported many times both prior and following this game, adding nothing of note. The article itself has little content beyond the list of games it contains, which is a very nice display of the game's impact. Emmy  Altava  03:26, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions.   Emmy   Altava  03:31, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Suggestion: Delete this article, but put a note on the articles for the games packaged that they were sold together in this pack. - Jorgath (talk) 17:54, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Cannot find reliable, secondary sources with significant coverage to satisfy WP:GNG. It's listed and mentioned on some WP:VG/RS sources, but none offer any extensive coverage or critical reception. An WP:ITEXISTS case. I suppose there is this "Nintendo Power 05/01/92 3.5 out of 5", but I have no way of accessing that and I don't know how much more coverage there is. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 12:32, 23 February 2012 (UTC)"
 * I got the Nintendo Power article and it's several pages of preview of the games, but it's a preview in the sense that it wasn't released then yet. It's basically a "how-to" guide. I don't know where GameRankings figured a 3.5/5 rating, but there are no ratings in the actual magazine and hardly any critical reception. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 13:49, 23 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep This retro-game was released in 3 continents... For me the article looks fine/ok. --Hydao (talk) 12:37, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * That is an WP:ITEXISTS argument -- released does not imply notable. Also article quality does not relate to notability either. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 13:49, 23 February 2012 (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.