Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grand Voyage


 * 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 Draftify‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 01:37, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Grand Voyage

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails WP:GNG as the article lacks sufficient reliable coverage and is WP:TOOSOON for an upcoming game. The article has one cited reliable source in the vein of WP:VG/S and is otherwise largely based on primary sources. A WP:BEFORE does not yield much in terms of coverage, but I note the Gamestar article was in German so welcome any help with non-English coverage if the game originates from that background. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 11:37, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 11:37, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  14:20, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete; article creator had one single edit, that edit being the creation of the article. Very possible conflict of interest, and I'm not seeing any notability. Negative  MP1  23:19, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:43, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Draftify for any interested parties to work on until appropriate for article space. - Indefensible (talk) 19:18, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
 * (Author) After creating this new page, I noticed that some of the development team members have previously worked also on the Titanic: Honor and Glory virtual museum software/videogame. Should we unite them? Should we create an umbrella-page for all this project that are team related (because they are creating several of this, even some other for further ships)?
 * I stopped because I don't know how to proceed, now that I'm seeing so many projects of the same type been sponsorized in the recent months. Don't worry, I wasn't payed nor contacted for this, I just saw this new project announced on YT and it was just... impressive (featuring even more characteristics than the Titanic one that I even downloaded and explored for months... and I thaught I had already seen all the best simulations possible).
 * Thank you for your attention.
 * @Vrxces @NegativeMP1 @Indefensible @Explicit
 * - LucaLindholm (talk) 00:50, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Draftify both in my opinion. - Indefensible (talk) 00:53, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I think it's better to draftify both and work on the pages until they have sufficient coverage. Merging them is not suitable unless they are related through a common studio or series. Combining loosely related pages to gather enough secondary content to establish notability isn't good form. The games are interesting, so I hope that there will be enough material to create comprehensive pages eventually! ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 07:12, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Draftify right now the sourcing just isn't there. It's possible on release it'll garner the coverage for an article. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs  talk 15:35, 27 September 2023 (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.