Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amiga Forever


 * 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. Doczilla @SUPERHEROLOGIST 22:55, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Amiga Forever

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This article may not meet the general notability guidelines. It is true that this Amiga emulator stands out as the only emulator licensed to distribute copies of the Kickstart ROM, and it is certainly well-known to the Amiga community, but I have not been able to find much coverage on the subject elsewhere. Of what I was able to find, the vast majority did come from mainstream publications dedicated to computers or video games, but a lot of these were just passing mentions or tutorials on how to run Amiga software on modern PCs, although some of them were reviews or announcements of newly released versions of Amiga Forever.

Never mind some of the issues troubling this article. One copyrighted image is enough, but two seems unnecessary, and all of its three sources are primary. The article lies on the boundary of being or not being notable, but I am more inclined to believing that it is not. I had the same issue a few months back with DX-Ball, a former article that I marked for deletion (a shame since I played that a lot, but that problem seems to be common with earlier freeware games). Similary, I would argue that UAE (emulator) is not notable and could simply be merged into this article in the event that it is kept, because this separately released software is included in the Amiga Forever package. I doubt that this article should be kept, but given its notability among Amiga enthusiasts, I cannot say where it should be merged. Amiga, Inc. since it licensed the software to distribute the Kickstart ROM? Kickstart (Amiga) since it is technically still being sold by this means as of this post? I would like some help on deciding the future of the article.  Free Media  Kid$  23:49, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions.  Free  Media  Kid$  23:49, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  Free  Media  Kid$  23:49, 12 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep There are reviews of this emulation package in published magazines inside (eg. Amiga Review issue 37 - Czech magazine, 1998) and outside of the Amiga bubble (c't 26/2013, p. 140 ). Should not be a problem to find more of this kind of coverage - enough in my POV to establish notability of the article subject. Pavlor (talk) 08:47, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Lots of results in google books. Also reviewed, including latest versions like here in PC World.-- Mvqr (talk) 11:42, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Other sources (Amiga magazines): CU Amiga July 98 p. 60; Amiga Future 128 (September/October 2017), p. 22 (there are more reviews of AF in other issues of this magazine). Pavlor (talk) 12:46, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep The Amiga was huge in its day. As this was the only official emulator, one would consider this as definitely noteable and passing WP:GNG. Also as noted, there is RS for it in Amiga magazines and I ran a search on google books, and it is mentioned there quite a bit - establishing notability Deathlibrarian (talk) 06:29, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment I've added a few extra references Deathlibrarian (talk) 06:39, 18 December 2021 (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.