Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Granny Smith (video 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. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 12:14, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Granny Smith (video game)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable mobile app. Article written like it's an ad. Modojo is not on WP:VGRS, and the Common Sense Media review is for a totally different game (just look at it!). So, when a Google search turns up no other reviews, we're left with TouchArcade, which is barely reliable in my opinion. We can't maintain an article on a single source. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 16:31, 2 December 2018 (UTC) Video game task (talk) 17:35, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I've change some citations as told to me, including additional reference, the homepage of the game developer and I've removed The Common Sense Review. Hope there is no else problem occur to this article. Thanks
 * You didn't look very hard. Adam9007 (talk) 17:45, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Pardon me. No other reliable reviews. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 17:47, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * They're all listed at VGRS. Adam9007 (talk) 17:53, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

I am in process for removing the bad references as you mention them. The new references are more intellectual and descriptive form. You can automatically remove these references that doesn't taste you, but don't despair to the deletion process. Video game task (talk) 18:15, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:18, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:19, 2 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep It passes WP:GNG per multiple reliable reviews that cover the game and are listed on the reliable sources list:
 * Touch Arcade (already in the article) https://toucharcade.com/2012/09/27/granny-smith-review/
 * Gamezebo https://www.gamezebo.com/2012/09/04/granny-smith-review/
 * Slide to Play http://www.slidetoplay.com/granny-smith-review/
 * AppSpy http://www.appspy.com/review/3441/granny-smith-review
 * Pocket Gamer https://www.pocketgamer.com/articles/044624/granny-smith/
 * 148Apps (situational source but still counts) http://www.148apps.com/reviews/granny-smith-review/
 * CNET https://www.cnet.com/reviews/granny-smith-review/
 * And to say a source is unreliable just because it is not found on the list, does not mean you can discount it already, and you should have opened the discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources to get a consensus of reliability/unreliability. That being said some coverage on the sites that have no consensus as of now.....
 * Tech in Asia https://id.techinasia.com/review-granny-smith (WP:GNG also includes foreign reviews, and this site seems very notable)
 * Gamer's Temple https://www.gamerstemple.com/featured-review/ios/1253/granny-smith-review
 * Modojo https://modojo.com/article/5478/granny_smith
 * This should be withdrawn in my opinion. Sorry, but this seems like a failure of WP:BEFORE. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 00:11, 3 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment Pinging you to check out my post. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 00:14, 3 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep as a notable video game passing WP:GNG with multiple reliable independent in-depth sources, specifically those at WP:VG/RS as per above matching links. — HELL KNOWZ   ▎TALK 12:53, 3 December 2018 (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.