Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Autobahn Police Simulator


 * 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 no consensus.  So Why  10:34, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Autobahn Police Simulator

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG. Topic lacks significant coverage from reliable secondary sources. The1337gamer (talk) 09:36, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. The1337gamer (talk) 09:36, 9 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Oppose I am seeing a few sources in german.  . To find them you need to search with the german name. —  InsertCleverPhraseHere  09:44, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Source 1 is a wordpress blog with no indication of editorial oversight or policy. Source 2 is authored by BIGJIM (experienced user), which implies it is not written by staff member. These two don't seem like reliable sources. The ComputerBild article seems useful and reliable, however one reliable source isn't enough. --The1337gamer (talk) 09:58, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Source 1 uses wordpress as an engine, but seems to be a legitimate game journalism site. The second source is a review by an 'experienced user' (whatever that title means), yes, but the site does not seem to allow self publishing so it must have been approved by the editorial team (i.e. editorial oversight), borderline but acceptable for a non-controversial article like this. —  InsertCleverPhraseHere  10:23, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Source 1 is not a legitimate game journalism site. Their About Us page says that it is a community gaming site: https://inthegame.nl/wie-zijn-wij/. There is no indication that they have professional writers or an editorial team. User generated content is generally unacceptable. I don't agree that we should be accepting user generated articles as reliable sources to bolster a game's notability. Just because the site allows self-publishing, this does not imply that it is approved by an editorial team. WP:SPS. --The1337gamer (talk) 10:33, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * In any case, here are two additional sources . I'll remove the disputed ones if you like as we have better. Edit: although please note that source 2 does not count as user generated content unless the site allows reviews to be posted without passing by the editorial board (i.e. like a forum), which does not seem to be the case at that particular site. Though I could be wrong as I am relying on G translate. —  InsertCleverPhraseHere  10:36, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh here are a couple more . Also in Eurogamer.de that they had a presentation at Gamescom . A mention in journaldugeek.com . The list goes on. No not all the sources are awesome, but it speaks to the main point: it meets GNG. —  InsertCleverPhraseHere  10:52, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:13, 16 July 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   08:29, 24 July 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.