Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cralotte


 * 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   speedy delete - no assertion of notability. ... disco spinster   talk  20:00, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Cralotte

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

Probable (but I don't think quite blatant) hoax which has had its prod removed. I can find no Google hits to indicate its existence. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:43, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - no sources supplied, and I find none. Either hoax or ad for un-notable product. JohnCD (talk) 11:47, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - Whether or not it is a hoax seems irrelevant. The author of the page wrote the phrase "Cralotte is not yet well known" which clearly indicates that even if the software exists, it is not notable.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:11, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, no sources and no notability asserted. Probably either a hoax or made up at school one day. J I P  | Talk 13:09, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:N Niteshift36 (talk) 13:45, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


 * DO NOT DELETE: as co-creator of the game i can assure all it is genuine. Both versions of the game are board games made available for around 1500 pupils of a local secondary school. The article never refered to cralotte as "soft-ware". The fact that it can not be found on google is not surprising if people such as yourselves get so stressed about the games "noteability" that they recommend it for deletion. The games have helped many students achieve high grades at GCSE.... Whether the games were created in a school or out of a school is irrelevent as they both still exist! Just because the game is "not well known" it certainly does not mean it is not noteable.... it merely means that the game has not been made available commercially or mass produced, it has nevertheless helped many and will continue to do so in the future. Whether people find the article of any interest, relevence or use is a matter of opinion and no solid reason for a reccomendation of deletion!
 * The article is a work-in-progress hence the lack of picture and sources...... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.254.49.123 (talk • contribs) 12 June 2009 — 149.254.49.123 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Hi there - just to clarify. On Wikipedia, notability has a very specific meaning. A notable subject is one that's received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources - like books, journals, newspapers, and so on. We're not saying this game isn't important (it might be: we can't tell, because we also haven't been given any verifiable evidence about it), but that until someone else has written about, we can't have an article on it. As an encyclopedia, this isn't the place to raise a profile or generate publicity. If you have any sources that could establish notability, by all means bring them here so we can discuss them. Gonzonoir (talk) 17:12, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails notability, verifiability, and not for things made up in school one day. Edison (talk) 15:53, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Edison - you make a very useless point all current issues with the article are referred 2 in the coment above yours... and no where in the article is the game refered as "being made up in school one day" If your gonna get so stressed about one article that will have no affect on your life whether it is deleted or not, u cud at least read the article first.... 2 b honset ur all bein silly - whats the matter with u all? the article clearly has significance to some people.... im quite surprised you have nothing better to do with ur lives.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cralotte (talk • contribs) 16:23, 12 June 2009 (UTC)  — Cralotte (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment' N u cud lurn 2 spel. Edison (talk) 01:26, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Edison - Me learn to spell? You might want to check how to spell learn, you retard. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.254.56.21 (talk) 19:55, 16 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Cralotte, please read carefully the guideline WP:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day. It explains clearly why your game is not yet suitable for a Wikipedia article. See particularly the bit at the end about Scrabble. JohnCD (talk) 17:06, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, read our no personal attacks policy. Do not attack other editors. MuZemike 17:12, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete – I cannot find anything that can provide any verifiability. MuZemike 17:15, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom.--Sandor Clegane (talk) 23:50, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete as spam. Article itself asserts non-notability. Edward321 (talk) 02:35, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per admitted non-notability.Headbomb {{{sup|ταλκ}}κοντριβς – WP Physics} 22:03, 15 June 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.