Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/F-14 Tomcat (pinball)


 * 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 redirect to WMS Industries. The rough consensus is that it's not independently notable, even after a reception section being added. Content can and perhaps should be merged from page history. Eddie891 Talk Work 13:14, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

F-14 Tomcat (pinball)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. PROD removed by a WP:SPA using edit summary "Laughable! This is an important article!" who is clearly not here to WP:BTE (90% of edits of this account are limited to PRO template removals). Just one of dozens non-notable pinballs in the Category:Pinball stubs we need to clean up (and by clean up, well, I am afraid I mean delete...). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 09:09, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  09:09, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  09:09, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  09:09, 28 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. The nominator is lying, I did not say Laughable! This is an important article!", but: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=F-14_Tomcat_(pinball)&diff=975067468&oldid=975067258 "14 thousand made, hundreds of millions of played games, it is important!". This pinball game was in wide service and as all such games in public arcades is notable!IQNQ (talk) 13:54, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, you used a slightly different edit summary here than elsewhere - easy to be confused when you copypaste the same bad and impolite rationale to a bunch of edit summaries except one. Anyway, WP:ITSIMPORTANT is not a good argument, try again. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 01:05, 29 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Redirect to WMS Industries, where it is already listed. None of the sources currently in the article appear to be from reliable sources.  Searching for additional sources turned up some more unreliable sources, and a number of sales pages, but no in-depth coverage in reliable, secondary sources.  As the manufacturer of the machine has an article, and this particular machine is already included there, a Redirect would be logical.  Rorshacma (talk) 15:27, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to WMS Industries per Rorshacma. - GizzyCatBella  🍁  02:26, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to WMS Industries, the only coverage that this pinball machine has ever generated is in unreliable or primary sources. Clear WP:GNG fail. Hog Farm Bacon 02:32, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep: I added a Reception section to the article, with a review of F-14 Tomcat from Cash Box magazine. There is also a positive mention of the game in the Top Score newsletter, and it's cited in The Complete Pinball Book (Schiffer, 2011) as a "prime example of how the pinball world had evolved since the beginning of [the 1980s]." I believe that this demonstrates notability. — Toughpigs (talk) 19:36, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Impressive find. Can we consider the Cash Box magazine reliable? The other mentions are more in passing, through the Rossignoli (201)) (not Schiffer 2011) mention is nice too (but it seems in passing?). Good job, a little more and I think we could consider this pinball notable. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:35, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, Cash Box was a reliable trade magazine. — Toughpigs (talk) 05:49, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Because... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:16, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ... because it was a national, professional trade magazine that was published for 54 years. It's similar to Billboard magazine. I'm not sure how to answer this question; how does one demonstrate that a magazine is or is not reliable enough to publish a review of a pinball machine? — Toughpigs (talk) 03:39, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * It's not an exact science, and I appreciate your explanation above which in lieu of other arguments seems sufficient to validate this source as reliable. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:54, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   08:11, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect. The sources cited above do not together constitute significant coverage. Worth adding at the redirect target, where the mention is currently unsourced. (not watching, please )  czar  02:52, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to WMS Industries sources don't exist for stand alone article. // Timothy ::  talk  05:44, 8 September 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.