Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big rigs:over the road racing

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was - kept

Big rigs:over the road racing
A review, not an article about the game. RickK 07:57, Jan 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, unless there is evidence of notability. Lacrimosus 08:24, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC) Seems to broad consensus that subject is notable. Lacrimosus 08:44, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, it's a stub that can be expanded and the fact that it is the worst game ever made is evident and makes it note worthy--203.29.151.3 10:13, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is the Plan 9 from Outer Space of video games. iMeowbot~Mw 11:27, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. So bad, it's good :) Dan100 17:17, Jan 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * No vote. If it actually is the Plan 9 (such the good film) of video games, then the article should have proof of that. The external link, incidentally, is broken. Mackensen (talk) 17:21, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Marginal keep but it needs to be rewritten top-to-bottom to remove POV (according to what authority is it the worst video game ever? I've heard the same said of Hell: A Cyberpunk Adventure and Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness). There are other videogame articles out there, so by that account it's worthy of a page, but what's here needs to be redone. Also the title of the article needs to be corrected for capitalization. 23skidoo 18:38, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * I've taken a first pass at addressing these concerns. Neutrality is difficult in this case because the game's sheer badness is precisely what makes it notable. iMeowbot~Mw 20:58, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * That's fair, plus there are a lot of articles on individual video games. But to remain NPOV someone pretty much needs to be quoted saying it's bad (i.e. "Video Game Magazine named it the worst game of 2004" or something like that). 23skidoo 22:50, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. VfD is not cleanup.   GRider\talk 19:16, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * What's that supposed to mean? Where did I mention cleaning the article up?  I suggested deletion.  RickK 20:02, Jan 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * It means that VfD is not a tool to remove POV. We have  and  tags already for this.  Welcome back.  GRider\talk 23:07, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Wrongly titled. If you keep it, rename it. Gdr 22:00, 2005 Jan 4 (UTC)
 * Keep, retitle and send it in for a major in-frame overhaul. Needs to be as NPOV as possible and needs to incorporate reasons why it's so bad...although the one online review I read sums it up pretty well.  To me, "Super Pitfall" for the Nintendo NES was and is the ne plus ultra of truly bad games.  This looks like it might actually be on a par! - Lucky 6.9 22:03, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, reword to be NPOV, but the subject does merit an article. Thryduulf 23:31, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and rename. Something this bad deserves an article(take a look at the gamespot video). --Aqua 06:49, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.