Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Army Men III


 * 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.  Sandstein  09:37, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Army Men III

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG. Non-notable fan game. Topic lacks significant coverage from reliable independent sources. The1337gamer (talk) 14:14, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. The1337gamer (talk) 14:15, 5 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete The article is superfluous due to its lack of notability.TH1980 (talk) 22:17, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Do NOT Delete I've updated the article with supporting references and citation. Hopefully it helps. The article should stay. --Vanguard2042 (talk) 02:14, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Reference 1 is some random YouTuber's channel. Not a reliable source.
 * Reference 2 is a ModDB page for a completely different game. It does not mention the subject of the article. It is also a primary source.
 * Reference 3 is a ModDB article on Unreal Engine. It does not mention the subject of the article.
 * Reference 4, 5, 6 are primary sources from the developer's of the fan game.
 * Reference 7 is an IndieDB page for a completely different game. It does not mention the subject of the article. It is also a primary source.
 * Not a single reference you've added contributes to the topic's notability. --The1337gamer (talk) 07:16, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Reference 1: That "random YouTuber" is the game's storywriter and director. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kNLp6CIReo
 * Reference 2: It's not a game, its a mod, and its where Army Men III originated from, at least according to Franklin (the dev behind the game).
 * Reference 3: I was just adding reference to the UDK's release and I thought I was required to cite the source with the history behind the start of their game.
 * Reference 4, 5, 6: This was just to confirm what happened to the game. Is there really anything wrong with that?
 * Reference 7: I guess that was probably best left out.
 * I took another look at my last edit and maybe they should've been listed as external links instead so I will add more to this article tomorrow.
 * When you said "notable sources" are you looking for press coverage? Reviews? Interviews? --Vanguard2042 (talk) 01:01, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Make sure you read the criteria at WP:GNG. Take a look at WP:RS, which discusses what constitutes reliable sources. For video games, see WP:VG/RS list. We are looking for things like credentials, editorial oversight, peer review, etc. We are looking for sources independent of the author/developer. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 11:47, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I polished the page a bit, I thought there were at least a couple more news sources but it seems only one I can find is from Small Dev Talk which I already know about that. According to the articles HELLKNOWS linked me, it says for notability I need at least one existing source. Seeing Small Dev Talk has interviewed a lot of other games, hopefully it counts right? --Vanguard2042 (talk) 10:56, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
 * UPDATE: For some reason, a bot deleted all of my work immediately for some reason when I moved the references to external links based on the advice here. Was I missing something? --Vanguard2042 (talk) 11:10, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
 * WP:GNG talk in plural about sources, so you need multiple sources (that also fit all the other criteria). 2 would be really really stretching it, as you couldn't really write significant content from that. So 3+ is usually the minimum when discussing article deletion. Small Dev Talk source is an interview -- thus it is essentially a primary source as the developer themselves give information. This could supplement the sourcing, if the interviewer is a reliable source, but it does not count for notability. The bot reverted the change, because you--as a new user--added a plain youtube link, which is almost always misused. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 13:09, 8 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. Clearly misses coverage from reliable sources. soetermans . ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 09:45, 6 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete as non-notable fan game failing WP:GNG with no secondary, independent, reliable, in-depth sources, such as WP:VG/RS. Sources in the article are not reliable. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 11:58, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Non-notable fan game with no reliable, secondary sources.  64.183.45.226 (talk) 20:01, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - per nom. Fails GNG. The1337gamer's assessment on the sources present is correct. Sergecross73   msg me  20:17, 7 February 2017 (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.