Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/9th Level Games


 * 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/merge. I'm unsure as to the notability of Kobolds, but I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt (awards etc), however the game is definitely not notable enough to warrant specific articles on its publisher and game system. I've started the merge from 9th to Kobolds, the rest is on the talk page. Maybe a small paragraph about the publisher? I don't think any of the content from BEER is needed, but if you disagree, I can always pull it out for you. yandman 08:25, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

9th Level Games

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

WP:BUSINESS. 4 employees, no Google News hits, no RS material in first 30 Ghits or in two footnotes. Tagged since 9/07 w/o material improvement. Also nominating Kobolds Ate My Baby and BEER Engine game system. THF (talk) 13:23, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, but Merge to a single article. "GHits" are not a qualifier for deletion per WP:GHITS and many notable companies in the RPG business have 4 employees or less (Eden has 3, GoO had 2, Palladium effectively has 1).  Currently we have only a small number of people dealling with all the game articles, so the rationalle here is not to delete, but rather to improve. Web Warlock (talk) 14:28, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Additional. WP:BUSINESS does not apply to Kobolds Ate My Baby or BEER Engine game system. Web Warlock (talk) 14:37, 21 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletion discussions.   -- the wub  "?!"  14:30, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep but Merge' as per Webwarlock. Edward321 (talk) 15:21, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge all/Keep per WW. There are a large number of moderate sources  for example.  As a relative expert I can certainly say these guys are notable and I'm sure they've won ENies or some other awards. Hobit (talk) 19:58, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge BEER engine into 9th level, Keep Kobolds as it now meets WP:N and is well-written to boot. Nice job WW. Hobit (talk) 13:38, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete the lot. The total of all the reliable independent sources for all these articles is insufficient to support any article.  I'm afraid that being sure they must have been recognised somewhere doesn't cut it after a year and a half of being flagged for fixing up.  Sources now, please, or the content can go until we have sources.  Delete the junk describes why. Guy (Help!) 21:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Well there seems to be a list of awards and review here and that was a 30-second search. Web Warlock (talk) 21:57, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Added 3 refs. Need to go home to get the details on another 2 and then a search for 2 more. All independent 3rd party publications. Web Warlock (talk) 22:43, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * UPDATE. the articles were added to the Kobolds Ate My Baby! article. Could not find the two print articles at home, still on a search for the other two.  I still support the merge of all of these into the main Kobolds article. Web Warlock (talk) 14:57, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Kobolds Ate My Baby!. Numerous awards are listed, and it is a fairly important game in RPG culture. Keep 9th Level Games. Since they published Kobolds, one would assume that the awards were given to them, although the article needs improvement. Deletion should be a last resort; I think that that article could be cleaned up. Neutral on BEER Engine game system; I doubt that there will be many reliable references about the system, but I could be wrong. Maybe merge it into the Kobolds article? Additionally, Wikipedia is not on a timeline; the length of time that cleanup has been needed is no reason for deletion. -Drilnoth (talk) 15:31, 23 January 2009 (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.