Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Formula 1 (board 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   keep. Stifle (talk) 13:25, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Formula 1 (board game)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Subject has not received significant coverage in reliable sources. References include a picture of the game, a blog, and a chat forum posting. Hirolovesswords (talk) 01:49, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  05:08, 25 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep: Game is historic dating from 1962; the time before the internet. One can be certain that there was plenty of coverage in reliable, paper sources at the time even if they are not presently available online. -Arb. (talk) 18:08, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep The topic is covered in detail by the V&A. Andrew D. (talk) 19:27, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete - Board games are usually pretty easy topics to find sources for -- even the old ones -- because of Board Game Geek's community gathering links to various reviews, podcasts, etc. internationally. the entry for this game has none. I found a handful of blog posts, etc. but not enough to pass WP:GNG. --&mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 03:58, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
 * what about the detailed entry in the collection of the Victoria and Albert museum, which I identified above? Andrew D. (talk) 13:36, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
 * While I think it's cool that they accepted/kept a bunch of games someone donated, I'm not so sure something existing in museum storage -- with no explanation of its significance and only a basic description -- goes very far. In other words, I can see why it would contribute to something's notability, but doesn't do it on its own and, at least to me, doesn't add enough to push it over a threshold. Not opposed to changing my !vote if a bunch of sources appear, of course, but I did look and did not find them. --&mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 13:42, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
 * The V&A's account of the subject both explains the significance of the item and provides a detailed description, not just a basic one. For example, it explains that "It was a success when released in 1962, and was released in various international editions throughout the next two decades."  And it tells us that "Cars are red, green, yellow, black, blue and orange."  This is clearly significant coverage. Andrew D. (talk) 08:24, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Fair enough; it's more than a basic description. Even if we call it significant coverage, though, the threshold is significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. They may be out there, but I haven't seen them yet. I've updated my !vote to Weak Delete. --&mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 15:30, 27 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep Reliable secondary sources are available. Significant coverage on multiple independent blogs and special-interest sites covering the topic in detail. The product is still available for purchase online, which indicates an active market of buyers and sellers with interest in the topic.
 * Daily Telegraph, November 2004: "In the 1970s, many a wet Saturday afternoon could happily be spent in your living room, ... Waddington's Formula 1 - the prince of all board games - on the floor."; April 2005: "Recommended retro purchases: .... Waddington's Formula One board game." Whizz40 (talk) 02:57, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Nether of those come close to significant coverage. --Hirolovesswords (talk) 16:54, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Those are two quotes I picked out. As mentioned above, what is notable is this game has received detailed attention from independent sources which can be collectively significant taken alongside the V&A source. The policy says significant coverage will vary by topic and, following Rhododendrites' guide above, for old board games this often takes the form of easy to find links to various reviews, podcasts, etc:
 * Grand Prix Games Overview - The Game Cabinet
 * Motor racing board game reviews - Dave Budd
 * Formula 1 - Board Game by Waddingtons - Vintage Playtime
 * Waddington's Formula One board game - Party Ideas
 * Inside Close Look At Vintage 1970 Waddingtons Formula One Board Game - YouTube
 * Waddington’s Formula I
 * Board Game: Formula 1. Car racing game - YouTube
 * Formula One vintage motor racing board game 1964 - Games Collector
 * Formula-1 - Board Game - BoardGameGeek. Whizz40 (talk) 04:11, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Updated article with two external links; one of the YouTube videos listed above and a paper using the game in a probability exercise. -Arb. (talk) 10:36, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Updated the article with the points of notability raised so far, per WP:EDITATAFD. Whizz40 (talk) 15:59, 27 January 2015 (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.