Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Castle Marrach


 * 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. Missvain (talk) 23:58, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Castle Marrach

 * – ( View AfD View log )

As a topic, this video game lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources such that we could write a dedicated encyclopedia article without resorting to original research. Its only extant coverage consists of primary sources and unreliable sources. The topic had no substantive additional analytical coverage in Google Books, Google Scholar, or a custom Google search of video game sources. There are no worthwhile redirect targets, as no related articles link here. czar 05:03, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions.  czar  05:03, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak keep I stumbled across this article a few months ago and almost nominated it for AFD myself but the reason I didn't is that the sources, while crummy, do seem to exist (see e.g.,, , , , ).  These obviously aren't the sources we like to see when we write VG articles but for older games (and particularly MUDs), I think this is the best we're going to get a lot of the time. That said, I know the VG community takes the quality of sources quite seriously (and for good reason), so I see the rationale for deletion, understand why this nomination was made, and certainly won't begrudge folks for voting to delete. DocFreeman24 (talk) 05:14, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment I know GameZone is reliable although I don't know about the other sources DocFreeman24 brought up, plus I found the game mentioned in this magazine, albeit in passing. If the source provided above are reliable, I could give this a weak keep if nothing else, but the current evidence I found is not promising. 👨x🐱 (talk) 12:57, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The above sources have no hallmarks of reliability. Even the Gamezone (first link) is not coverage—it's a directory listing. The GNG requires sustained coverage. czar  04:33, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Apart from GameZone, none of the sources cites are reliable. Even the GameZone one is an auto-generated overview hosting only the one-paragraph description found on the game's homepage.  IceWelder  &#91; &#9993; &#93; 09:09, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 02:09, 28 April 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 18:46, 5 May 2021 (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.