Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben Jordan: Paranormal Investigator (2nd nomination)


 * 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. The Bushranger One ping only 02:40, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Ben Jordan: Paranormal Investigator
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

In previous AFD, article was kept on basis of unverified claim this was mentioned in a major magazine (which, if true, even by itself would not justify an article) and some then new added sources, which, upon examination, fail WP:RS criteria. Article fails WP:SOFTWARE and WP:GNG. There are not multiple, independent *reliable sources* covering this in a nontrivial way, which is required before having a Wikipedia article. AGS awards are not notable awards for determining notability. These awards are so trivial they aren't even mentioned on the Adventure Game Studio article. But this brings up another damning point: these aren't even individual games but essentially modules released for another piece of software, like a fan-created DOOM level. DreamGuy (talk) 16:35, 7 July 2012 (UTC) DreamGuy (talk) 16:35, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Rebuttal
First, this is an independently developed, free game that now has posts from half a dozen different websites that review (primarily free) computer games. So, if articles can be posted on free games, then the references meet the criteria of WP:RS and WP:GNG.

Next, AGS Awards are now posted on the Adventure Game Studio article.

The only justification for removing this article can be is that these references are, thus far, insufficient.

The idea that the game qualifies as a mod is simply false. Adventure Game Studio is an game engine. Classifying Ben Jordan as a mod is comparable to stating that Half-Life 2 is a mod of Counter-Strike: Source because they use the same engine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cogliostro (talk • contribs) 03:07, 21 July 2012 (UTC) — Cogliostro (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:50, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:51, 7 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 23:51, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KTC (talk) 11:48, 22 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Vanity article with no evidence of WP:GNG whatsoever. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 02:58, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - unremarkable game, fails all notability guidelines. References do not appear to be from independent reliable sources. MikeWazowski (talk) 03:02, 23 July 2012 (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.