Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Catapult Run


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 06:52, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Catapult Run

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence of notability could be found. Apart from the one review given, all I see are fora, fansites, wikis, or old adverts in other magazines like Dragon. Company doesn't have an article either, so no obvious redirect target. Fram (talk) 08:46, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 08:46, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 08:46, 19 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete - The single review already included in the article appears to be the only big of reliable sourced coverage this adventure received, thus it fails the WP:GNG. The publisher and none of the staff involved appear to be, themselves, notable, so there are no suitable targets for a Redirect or Merge.  Rorshacma (talk) 14:34, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - There are reviews in Abyss magazine (out of print) and Alarums & Excursions (still being published). I am trying to find copies of either or both, but these would seem to indicate notability. Guinness323 (talk) 03:11, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per above comments since there are WP:RS to retain, per WP:PRESERVE and WP:ATD. BOZ (talk) 17:01, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * If there was somewhere to merge this, I'd probably suggest that, but there isn't. keep as it meets WP:N. Hobit (talk) 06:12, 22 May 2020 (UTC)


 * The Alarums & Excursions source, apart from being a fanzine, is not a source which counts to notability, as it is an article written by Chris Abbott, creator of this game. So a pure primary source. This is not a review. So, apart from the original review, we only have the Abyss magazine, which seems to be some fanzine as well, not something usually considered a WP:RS. Fram (talk) 08:27, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it isn't enough for something to be mentioned in a source, the source itself needs to be able to be considered a reliable source, and I am not really seeing anything that would indicate that Abyss could be counted as such. Fanzines seem to largely fall into the WP:SELFPUBLISHED category of non-reliable sources.  Case in point, Abyss was published by "Ragnarok Enterprises", a group run by David Nale, who is also the creator and main contributor of the fanzine.  Rorshacma (talk) 18:37, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete, one reliable review is not enough to establish notability, fails GNG. Devonian Wombat (talk) 01:36, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  qedk ( t  愛  c ) 08:11, 27 May 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   10:59, 3 June 2020 (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.