Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flux Family Secrets


 * 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  per cleanup by Supes--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:42, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Flux Family Secrets

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Ad by COI account for non-notable game Orange Mike   &#x007C;   Talk  02:10, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Delete- As per Non notable, and COI -- Rockstone  talk to me!   05:00, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment As I see it, this article can be edited to meet Wikipedia's standards. I've edited Flux Family Secrets: The Ripple Effect, an article that is of similar subject created by the same user who created the article we are discussing, to remove ad-like content and establish notability until I brought it to what I believe is of appropriate quality. It's not perfect, but it's perfect enough for inclusion IMO. While Flux Family Secrets is currently written like an advertisement from someone with a COI, there's nothing stopping anyone from improving the article, so I don't think that, by itself, that's a good reason for deletion when it's got potential. I myself am willing and would like to edit the article to fix any problems, as I did with the one I previously mentioned, hopefully within the next day or two. I'd do it now, but it's past midnight. Go figure. Thanks, ~Super Hamster  Talk Contribs 05:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Additional Comment I've updated the page. ~Super Hamster  Talk Contribs 01:46, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions.  ~Super Hamster  Talk Contribs 05:16, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep per my edit to the page. I've updated the page to meet concerns brought up in both this discussion and the tags on the page, among other things. Notability has been established and the article no longer reads like an advertisement. ~Super Hamster  Talk Contribs 01:46, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep, sources look good to me. SharkD   Talk  01:59, 4 July 2010 (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.