Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chronicles of Ramlar


 * 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   keep. WP:SNOW  MBisanz  talk 00:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Chronicles of Ramlar

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

No notability established, no reliable sources except for a single review dragged up across all of the internet, which doesn't come anywhere close to establishing a reason for this to have a Wikipedia article. Another case of an article that had a prod removed by an editor who seemingly solely exists here to remove prods for no reason. DreamGuy (talk) 18:58, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. Plenty of sources available in addition to the one already in the article, e.g. .  Also worth noting is that there is a book series set in the world of this game, with at least some reviews of those books providing additional reflection on the game. JulesH (talk) 21:43, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 *  Delete  as notability is not established. If it's notable, improve the article please don't just cough up references here in discussion. --Boston (talk) 00:16, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep since it seems the reviews added are independently written (not just one review cloned). It was, however, entirely appropriate to bring this to AfD debate.  Thanks for improving article. --Boston (talk) 23:04, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - several 3rd party review for this game are available. Here's another one Esasus (talk) 22:04, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletion discussions.  --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  15:37, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Never heard of it, but the flames review by itself does it. Cool site that, never saw it before and it will be darn useful in sourcing game/RPG stuff in the future.  Hobit (talk) 17:04, 5 March 2009 (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.