Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Empire (online game)


 * 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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 22:41, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Empire (online game)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This topic lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources such that we could write a dedicated encyclopedia article on the topic without resorting to original research. It has not been the subject of extended analysis and its only extant coverage consists of minor directory listings: this paragraph and the listing quoted nearly in full in the References. 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 our List of MUDs only lists games with their own articles. czar 22:03, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions.  czar  22:03, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. I agree with the fact that there is very little coverage of it (and the relatively small article largely depends on such coverage). It is extremely unlikely that anyone would be able to extend the article into a full encyclopedic one, as the game is no longer playable, and I am fairly confident that the topic of MUDs has largely fallen out of fashion to the point where any information about Empire (which is likely to be trivial) is buried under pages upon pages of more relevant search results or locked away in old books. Lankyliver (talk) 13:10, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Nowhere near enough citations and coverage to satisfy WP:GNG. You can't write a comprehensive article with four sources. Namcokid  47  13:46, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete As per nom. Fails in satsifying GNG. Wrenaudra (talk) 15:19, 18 April 2021 (UTC) Blocked sock. See Sockpuppet investigations/SpareSeiko. Blablubbs&#124;talk 12:21, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nom fails GNG. RockOften (talk) 17:29, 18 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. IceWelder  &#91; &#9993; &#93; 09:10, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: No reliable sources, no evidence of notability. Fails GNG. TheDreamBoat (talk) 07:52, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination, fails WP:GNG. SunDawn (talk) 03:21, 22 April 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.