Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jnes (emulator)


 * 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 delete. Randykitty (talk) 17:00, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Jnes (emulator)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:N as a non-notable video game emulator. The current sources are all trivial mentions on (mostly) questionable sites. I looked for sources using the WP:VG/RS custom Google searches as well as a standard Google search but only found more trivial and unreliable sources. Woodroar (talk) 14:21, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Woodroar (talk) 14:21, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Woodroar (talk) 14:21, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

  The article notes: "Jnes is one of the most accurate Win32 based emulators."  The article notes: Jnes doesn’t have a ton of features, but it’s probably the easiest to get up and running out of the box. It doesn’t have horrible input lag with vsync on, and it has a one-click option for accurate colors (though it isn’t turned on by default), so you can get a decent experience pretty quickly, as long as you don’t need or want any other advanced features.
 * Delete Non-notable, per nom.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 07:55, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete A few brief mentions in reliable sources does not provide significant coverage hence fails WP:GNG.  Spy-cicle💥   Talk? 19:53, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Jnes developed in 1999 is among the oldest emulators still actively used. It has been covered by multiple secondary reliable sources giving the subject non-trivial coverage.

There are a ton of other NES emulators out there (seriously, way more than you’d expect), but these are the most popular.   The article notes: "JFor playing classic NES games, JNES is the most popular emulator, and for N64, Project 64. For PlayStation, may people use EPSXE, and for PS2, many people use PCSX2. There you go, emulators allow you to play Pokemon on your phone, Super Mario Bros. on your computer." There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Jnes to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". GNG does not say brief, but trivial which is defined as "of little value or importance". Developed in 1999, it is among the oldest emulator still used today. It has been defined as "most accurate", among the "most popular", "top 5 emulators" and "the easiest to get up and running out of the box". This is not trivial coverage and is significant. Valoem talk contrib</b> 08:21, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Firstly, Gameranx is unreliable per WP:VG/RS. Secondly, the short mention in Game Console Hacking is two sentences and the three sentence mention in LifeHacker (assuming that is even reliable since it is not  listed as reliable under WP:VG/RS) does not demonstrate its coverage as signfiicant enough to deem it notable enough to have an article. A few brief mentions in listicles is not significant coverage.  Spy-cicle💥   Talk? 13:28, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Gameranx is a popular game reviewer with over 5.4 million subscribers. He is reliable as is Linus Sebastian which has a similar range of viewers, therefore there are three reliable sources. These mentions are brief, but not trivial. <b style="color: DarkSlateGray;">Valoem</b> <b style="color: blue;">talk</b> <b style="color: Green;">contrib</b> 20:07, 6 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete The user that posted the sources above doesn't understand that significant coverage means "addresses the topic directly and in detail" They do not establish notability because none of them are WP:SIGCOV, and none address the emulator indepth. I have searched books and even scholar articles and I found nothing that would count as significant coverage of the subject.
 * 1) The book has 1 sentence about it ("one of the most accurate Win32 emulators") with a url.
 * 2) 2 sentences in a list of NES emulators, not indepth
 * 3) Seems unreliable like Spy mentioned above. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 13:47, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I've been here since 2006 and quite understand what passes GNG. We have a concept called WP:PRESERVE. You are correct, the mentions in the sources do not cover the subject in detail, however the coverage is clearly not trivial. Trivial coverage would say something like "Jnes is an emulator which was used from 1999 to 2005" or "Jnes is a Win32 based emulator", I've defined trivial above from the dictionary. Statement such as "the most accurate" and "top emulator" currently used is not trivial, it is saying the emulator is among the top performers in the industry. I've stated on the nominator's page that this would be better as a merge, but because a merge target does not exist WP:PRESERVE is invoked. There are also foreign sources which have not been added to the article such as . NES emulator is more popular in South America and such sources have yet to be added. <b style="color: DarkSlateGray;">Valoem</b> <b style="color: blue;">talk</b> <b style="color: Green;">contrib</b> 20:07, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * WP:PRESERVE is not a greenlight for standalone articles on subjects with no indepth coverage, just because there is no appropriate merge target as List of video game console emulators only contains notable/wiki article entries. It doesn't even mention keeping articles at all. The article you posted just name drops JNES once, so not even that. Maybe this emulator will become notable in the future, but not now. It fails our main guideline in WP:GNG (like you said, the coverage while non-trivial is also not in detail) and that is all we need to know here. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 21:25, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * There are sources that cover the topic in details in the article itself:

<ol> <li> The article notes: Now, if you are someone who is quite lazy and you want something in which all you gonna wanna do is open the ROM and start playing. Then, you should consider downloading and installing the jNES Emulator on your Windows 10 PC. Now, though the emulator does not offer a lot of features, but it surely does the job for what it is developed pretty well.

The User Interface of the jNES is pretty straightforward and simple. It does offer a few features which includes using a gamepad, controlling sound and adjusting screen size. You can download and use this NES Emulator on your Windows 10 PC for completely free. </li> <li> The article notes: If you own any range of PC, Mac or maybe even a decent Android phone, emulators are a way you can play some older games. Just note that downloading emulators and ROM are technically kind of illegal so we're not condoning or endorsing any of this but we are just talking about it because it's out there and people use them.

For playing classic NES games, JNES is the most popular emulator, and for N64, Project 64. For PlayStation, may people use EPSXE, and for PS2, many people use PCSX2. There you go, emulators allow you to play Pokemon on your phone, Super Mario Bros. on your computer.

Use them if you will, it's a good way to get easy access to classic games, but just know that people made this game. Even if they made them in 1987 they still need to feed their families, I guess. Unless their families are dead. It's been a long time. </li> In detail is requires at least a paragraph mention in an article and more than just one or two sentences. I went ahead and posted the full details from the articles. <b style="color: DarkSlateGray;">Valoem</b> <b style="color: blue;">talk</b> <b style="color: Green;">contrib</b> 22:35, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Gameranx is unreliable per consensus mentioned already anx Windowsable is a blog without a staff page even. Also please stop WP:BLUDGEONing this AfD. You are the article's creator and I get your passion, but the subject simply is not notable. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 01:31, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Gameranx has been discussed several times at WT:VGRS and it has always been found to be unreliable because it lacks all of the traits we look for in a reliable source (mastheads, editor credentials, author credentials, etc.). They have nowhere near 5M subscribers, and even if they did, it wouldn't matter because popularity doesn't mean a site is automatically reliable. Windowsable also fails to meet any signs of reliability, plus the source is two paragraphs in a listicle written by an amateur. Woodroar (talk) 23:27, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * They have 5.42 million subscribers and is one of the main tech channels and they have made a list of what the main emulators used are per console. JNES is the most popular NES emulator. <b style="color: DarkSlateGray;">Valoem</b> <b style="color: blue;">talk</b> <b style="color: Green;">contrib</b> 23:33, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * BuzzFeed has 19.7M subscribers and says that a $1 bagel is better than a $1,000 bagel. Is that true? Maybe. But I certainly wouldn't put that in an article. Woodroar (talk) 00:21, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
 * That's an opinion piece on a show and it doesn't say a $1 bagel is better than $1000, it says based on their opinion that the $1 bagel is a better deal than a $1000 bagel and you can put that in an article. Being hosted on the show certainly can give subjects notability. It would look something like this:


 * "According to Buzzfeed's series Worth It New York City's Utopian Bagels is the best deal when compare to three different price points for bagels including a $1000 bagel from Einat Admony."


 * In the case of Gameranx, this is not a show but an article published which states the emulator is the most popular for NES emulation. Also gameranx does have both editorial and author credentials. <b style="color: DarkSlateGray;">Valoem</b> <b style="color: blue;">talk</b> <b style="color: Green;">contrib</b> 02:30, 7 January 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.