Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baldi's Basics In Education and Learning


 * 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. clear consensus  DGG ( talk ) 07:38, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Baldi's Basics In Education and Learning

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article about non-notable video game with no indication of meeting WP:GNG, WP:PRODUCT, or WP:WEB. Cursory search turns up only one RS that devotes any attention to the game, an April 12 article on Kotaku, which is well short of significant coverage.

The author has also uploaded images of the game's assets to Commons, which have been marked as copyright violations. In response to PRODding of the article, creator uploaded more game asset images. RA 0808 talkcontribs 00:23, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions.  RA 0808  talkcontribs 00:23, 4 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete: (I was considering filing a CSD for this page, actually, but I think an AfD would be better. So thank you for this.) I can't find much, if anything, about this video game, or its notability; there is one article addressing it, no sustained coverage over time, and the sourcing is suspect (I seem to recall there was one reference to the Wikia for the game in an earlier version of the article, if not now). Additionally, the images used for illustration of the game are quite probably (in this editor's view) copyright violations, and should be removed post-haste, if they haven't been already. All in all, I think this is a pellucid matter: deletion is the only available option here. &mdash; Javert2113 (talk; please ping me in your reply on this page) 00:42, 4 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi, this is the creator of the article, this is a lot about this game, on the internet and youtube! Also you deleted a lot of my work so will you please bring it back! People want an article about this, you don't need to delete it!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnster2222 (talk • contribs) 00:50, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
 * There actually is not a lot about this game. Let's players on YouTube are not reliable sources, and as I mentioned above the only other mentions that was actually signicificant coverage of the game is the April 12 article on Kotaku. Regarding the content: All the content that I removed consisted of copyright violations, either text copied from the game's itch.io page or images of game assets that are copyrighted to the game's developer. RA 0808  talkcontribs 02:40, 4 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete - deos, this is a rather brutal article, nevertheless I've tried to focus on the actual reasons for deletion. I would say three main come to mind.
 * - The article reads as a marketing piece, under WP:DEL4, however I wouldn't say that there is no encyclopedic content
 * - There are copyvio issues, even with the pics removed. I suppose technically direct quotes could be put round the update log bits, but deleting them (or replacing with 2 line summaries of major changes) would seem to be the actual route to take.
 * - The real killer is that as mentioned above, notability. As covered, Kotaku seems the only appropriate ref (I've added it, so at least the quoted paragraph is covered). However there just isn't sufficient reliable coverage to support the article, everything else can't be independent. Nosebagbear (talk) 10:01, 4 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. I have no idea how this ended up on my watchlist, but this does not fulfill notability criteria and isn't written like an encyclopedic article, so would need to be completely rewritten if it were somehow kept. 14:13, 4 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. I think it's a bit too soon for this article to be created, not to mention the fact that the article is a complete disaster. I think this game is notable in terms of general popularity, but not notable in terms of wikipedia's notability guidelines. I say we wait a few months to see if there are enough reliable sources covering this game in depth and if that's not the case, then this article should not be on Wikipedia. So for now, delete this article. 317917661X (talk) 20:04, 4 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. I just did a good chunk on the article, and I spent a long time on it. I will continue to add to the article if it will be kept. Let me maintain the article, don't delete it! I think people will see it since it has a huge fan service. Timwardo (talk) 00:06, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment. Just because you worked hard on improving the article doesn't mean it shouldn't be deleted. There simply aren't enough independent, reliable, secondary sources for this article to be on wikipedia. 317917661X (talk) 12:33, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Side Comment. I understand your point 317917661X, but I wasn't stating my work as a reason why the article should be kept. I was stating I put a great deal into it and it stinks that It has to be deleted. Although someone deleted all my work and not the page >:( Timwardo (talk) 18:24, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment. First of all, calm down. Secondly, you said the real reason you don't want it deleted is because you put a great deal into it, which is literally you saying that you don't want the article to be deleted because you put a lot of work into it. You just worded the way you said it differently. Third, I deleted your work because it didn't cite many sources and some of it didn't look encyclopedic, such as the description saying in large text that it doesn't apply to certain versions. Thanks for understanding. 317917661X (talk) 19:56, 6 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Strong delete - Despite one article from Kotaku (the Know your Meme reference is user-generated content, and thus doesn't count), the game is just not notable. It's been making the rounds on social media and "Let's Plays", but temporary memetic popularity doesn't justify inclusion on an encyclopedia. Besides, even if the article could be kept, I'd suggest a complete rewrite due to the current unencyclopedic tone. Nanophosis (talk) 00:09, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I understand the problem, but are you mentioning my contribution, because i can still work on it. I am very serious on this article and hope to improve it, just don't delete my work :( Timwardo (talk) 00:20, 5 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. I'm sorry who ever created this article, but... This can't be on Wikipedia, because first of all i don't like it because the article doesn't contain an infobox of the game, without it, it just makes it look boring, second: i feel that this article is just sponsoring the game instead of saying useful information about the game and third: it uses a user-generated content page as reference. Don't make an article just because it's popular, you need to write remarkable information about it. If you really took alot of work making this then, save it on your Wikipedia sandbox, or just keep it on your computer as a text file to make more improvements and remember: you need to use reliable sources as references, if you can't find good enough references then, just wait until they appear. Like 344917661X said, it's too soon to appear in Wikipedia. --Lebert130 (talk) 01:50, 5 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. Doesn't meet standards for an average Wikipedia video game article I've been reading so far. Not to mention a bunch of copyvios committed by the author that had to be removed by someone else, both text and media. The article creation seems to be influenced by a Reddit thread here, which, incidentally enough, the creator has also commented in under the alias /u/JohnsterSpace. Sorry about the mess here, /u/JohnsterSpace, but this game simply does not meet Wikipedia's notability criteria, and it seems to be created waaaay too early, plus you've added in copyvios that had to removed by someone else. Being that this is a small Unity indie game, if doesn't get enough coverage by independent sources, then there's no way there could be a Wikipedia article about that game. theinstantmatrix (talk) 03:46, 7 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. YouTube videos do not equal notability. Lojbanist remove cattle from stage 22:05, 9 June 2018 (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.