Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kineti-Go


 * 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. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:52, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Kineti-Go

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable, conflict of interest and barely-disguised promotion of something recently made up and productized. It maybe bordered on speedily deletable per G11 as promotional, but the author already deleted the proposed deletion tag I put on the article, indicating a belief that the product is notable, and has attempted to cite external sources to support this idea (some were bot-removed as invalid per external linking policy, e.g. links to known unreliable, user-edited sites like About.com). The article author,, a single-purpose account who has made no edits other than to this article and to advertise it in the see-also sections of mostly unrelated games, is the inventor and seller of the product and proprietor of the eponymous, seemingly one-product company Kineti-Go Games (he names himself in the article and is named in the one reliable but trivial source cited). This also touches on both WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY and WP:COMPANY issues, inasmuch as the article is a three-in-one promo piece. The author also attempted to use an interview with himself as if it were a reliable source. There's basically no showing of multiple instances of non-trivial coverage in editorially independent reliable sources. All we have is: I'm sure it's a fun game if you like small-scale tabletop shuffleboard, of this which is just a magnetic variant, but this is nowhere near notable enough for an article here, and the promotional conflict of interest is a major non-neutral point of view problem, too. Kineti-Go is yet another "garage band" of the gaming world for now; it could become notable at some point in the future, but isn't there yet. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  07:28, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * A local-interest piece from a small community newspaper about how locals "Tom and Marlene England" carry the game in their store – it is not available from mainstream outlets (each game set appears to be hand-made from wood, so this is not surprising) – and interviewing the game-maker at a toy fair (another event interview and photos from same were the subject of the deleted About.com links).
 * An entirely user-written review/webboard site that fails WP:RS again.

Update : Recent attempts to improve the article have actually made it far worse, turning it into a puff piece about the company that cites the company's own website repeatedly and promotes its other gaming products, while citing nothing but trivial local mentions from a long time ago, e.g. this one which states that only 20 retail outlets even carry this essentially home-made game. It's just utterly non-notable. Sorry. Trivial coverage in small-town newspapers does not satisfy the general notability guideline. I removed a couple of links to personal gamer blogs like this one per WP:RS and WP:EL; they[re not reliable sources and not something that we should link to for any encyclopedic reason. I improved one source citation. But the kind of local-paper coverage that is all this game has is the same kind of trivial "human interest" coverage that people get for winning the homecoming game in high school football or whatever. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  04:38, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 11:56, 6 March 2012 (UTC)


 * My experience with Kineti-go has been extremely positive. I live in a metropolitan area, visitors come frequently. There are two things that people love to do when visiting, see the city and play this game. Both are unique and both offer enjoyment to many. So it seems to be a relevant and notable article as people enjoy the game and it is becoming more popular. I believe if this page is removed people seeking information about it's history and related information would be harder to attain. I would, however, like to see some information about the physics involved added to the Wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.148.10.134 (talk) 16:15, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Apparent WP:MEATPUPPET; this entire IP address has only ever made 3 edits, an only in the last year. Nothing said here is WP:Verifiable. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  05:19, 13 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Kineti-Go was popular in my college town at several bars and game rooms. It offers a compact and fast-paced alternative to pool and darts and is easily accessible by virtually anyone. Some photos or diagrams of games and explanation of rules would help enhance this entry, but I don't believe it should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.90.213.130 (talk) 17:34, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Apparent WP:MEATPUPPET; this entire IP address has only ever edited this AfD page. Nothing said here is WP:Verifiable. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  05:19, 13 March 2012 (UTC)


 * This article should not be erased and certainly does not warrant speedy deletion.
 * First, according to wikipedia policy, If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article or stand-alone list.


 * "Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail, so no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material.[1] This criteria is met in the Gazette article and on some of the reviews listed. More links will be coming too.


 * "Reliable" means sources need editorial integrity to allow verifiable evaluation of notability, per the reliable source guideline. Sources may encompass published works in all forms and media, and in any language. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability.   The Gazette is a reliable source according to Wikipedia criteria "Sources",[2] for notability purposes, should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. The number and nature of reliable sources needed varies depending on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources. Multiple sources are generally expected.[3] Sources are not required to be available online, and they are not required to be in English. Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability.


 * The Gazette is a secondary source.


 * "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by those affiliated with the subject or its creator. For example, self-publicity, advertising, self-published material by the subject, the subject's website, autobiographies, and press releases are not considered independent.[4]


 * The Gazette is independent of the subject


 * Wikipedia definition of Self-promotion


 * WP:SELFPROMOTE does not apply here


 * Conflict of interest often presents itself in the form of self-promotion, including advertising links, personal website links, personal or semi-personal photos, or other material that appears to promote the private or commercial interests of the editor, or their associates.


 * Examples of these types of material include:


 * Links that appear to promote products by pointing to obscure or not particularly relevant commercial sites (commercial links).


 * Links that appear to promote otherwise obscure individuals by pointing to their personal pages.


 * Biographical material that does not significantly add to the clarity or quality of the article.


 * There is nothing in this article that can be construed as promotional. It is strictly factual. It includes a basic summary, equipment, gameplay, and origins. Nothing more, nothing less. The article points to a relevant website- www.kinetigo.com,which explains the rules of the game and the origins. Iphone points to apple.com. Ford f150 points to Ford- That is just how it is.


 * No individuals are pointed to here. The "About" link I added was to convince you of Kineti-Go's notibility. A well know website seeking out the owner of the company to interview him about the company's games. That is notable by most people's definition.


 * As for me not editing other articles...I am not sure what that has to do with this. I stick with what I know. If more people stick to what they knew on Wikipedia it would be a much more reliable source. I am en expert on Kineti-Go and other parlor/table games. That is what I know. Would you like me to edit Busan, Korea to get more credibility with you?


 * You statement "promotional conflict of interest is a major problem" has no merit. As stated earlier,there is nothing promotional in this article and Wikipedia does not have an explicit policy against conflicts of interest.I did follow the suggested guidelines.


 * Your claims of a one product company and entirely handmade products are also inaccurate. Check your sources for that.
 * As for linking to and advertising in unrelated games, Those are very much related games. You may want to look at the links again.


 * In summary, I believe that you have failed to make your case for non-notable, self promotion, and something recently made up( The game is 8 years old).


 * This page should remain up!
 * Mstromberg (talk) 19:38, 6 March 2012 (UTC) — Mstromberg (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * "Don't delete" there is a New Have Register article I will be posting a link to later today. If the two previous articles don't establish Notability (though it hey do per Wikipedia policy), the addition of this thrid paper will certainly do .  MStromberg71.234.49.115 (talk) 13:22, 7 March 2012 (UTC) — MStromberg (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Don't Delete I have just added a reference to a New Haven Register article about Kineti-Go to the references section of the article in discussion. We now have two newspaper articles in Maryland covering the game as the primary topic of the article, one newspaper article from South Carolina,and one From New Haven, Connecticut. In addition, there are links to online reviews of Kineti-Go at a well known game forum, the Kineti-Go website, two links to bloggers reviews, and two links addressing Kineti-Go that were deleted by the bot.
 * All of the points in the motion to delete this article have been thoroughly addressed and there are no grounds to delete this article.
 * The suggestion to delete this article should be dismissed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mstromberg (talk • contribs) 20:56, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * That's too much of a wall of text to respond to in detail, and most of it's moot anyway, since the only real issue here is notability. Your newspaper coverage is utterly trivial, and that's the only coverage there is. It's also old, indicating no lasting notability. The article is clearly promotional (even more so now than it was before!), promoting not only the game but the company's other gaming products, citing the company's own website and press release as soruces for claims about how widespread the game supposedly is.  The problems with this article have not been addressed at all, and if anything it is worse now. PS: Eight years ago is still "recently made up" for encyclopedic purposes, especially when there's apparently been no new coverage since 2005 or so, shortly after product launch. — SMcCandlish    Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  04:38, 13 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete—I think that the nom-statement is a little harsh, but the over-the-top protests of the clearly COI-infected article creator don't help matters. I did find one additional source, but only the abstract is available on-line...   What I will say is that I would expect a notable product developed in 2005 to have enduring coverage, not two mentions in regional papers in the same year the product launched.  Since the coverage seems to be one-shot coverage and there hasn't been any mention of the product since then, I have to agree that the product seems non-notable.  WP:PRODUCT seems to set a pretty high bar for product articles; I sincerely hope that nobody here thinks this is equally notable as the iPhone.  Liv it ⇑ Eh?/What? 23:57, 6 March 2012 (UTC)


 * "Don't delete". While the inventor of the game may be the primary author of the article, I find the article to be fact based and not promotional. Wikipedia is a great resource for objective and factual information to be collected, as well as a reference to other sources of primary information. The links to BoardGameGeek for third party reviews and newspaper features are a start. There is a "chicken and the egg" is with the notion of "notable" articles. This is especially difficult for inventions/products that are not mass produced (and heavily marketed/seeded by large corporations) or technology oriented (where products are readily internet-accessible and targeted at internet users).
 * I'm pleased that this article exists, I would like it to remain as a reference article for others curious about this game and its origins. I'm not in anyway associated with M Stromberg, nor do I even own a Kinetigo game. I'm a curious potential customer that spent quite some time trying to find out more about this game when I first learned about it. Without the wikipedia article, I would have been lost in search engine land. (Sorry I think I put this comment in the Talk section) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.105.141.161 (talk) 15:54, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * That is a WP:ILIKEIT and WP:ITSUSEFUL argument. The fact that it is difficult for new products to establish notability does not mean that they don't have to establish notability. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  05:19, 13 March 2012 (UTC)


 * SmMcCandlish why are you just proposing deletion for this article now? The history shows it has been on Wikipedia for over six years. I checked some of the links that this article points to. Pitchnut is a much stronger candidate for deletion than this article. So is Pinchonette. Neither cite references or sources and both are non-notable by Wikipedia standards. One has never been produced ,is only hand made, and is popular " in 2 farming villages in Ontario". Kineti-go has had four primary articles written about it in three papers in three states. There is also a reference to Montana in the article. That spans most of the USA. I guess I am confused as to why you would suggest deleting this article now and not suggesting it for the other game articles you have a history of editing? What connection am I missing?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.234.49.115 (talk) 02:38, 8 March 2012 (UTC) — Derekbyron (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * 'DON'T DELETE Although Kinetigo is a product, it's value as an accessible and tangible educational tool for the physics of polarity and the the nature of magnetic forces should merit it's availability on Wikipedia as a resource. It has successfully been used in math and science classrooms as a teaching tool.  Additionally, the company has a history of donating games to schools.  Kinetigo is as much a "product" as it is an exercise in demonstrating some otherwise abstract laws of physics.  This page should remain as a resource for anyone researching magnetic forces and their application.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Derekbyron (talk • contribs) 13:53, 8 March 2012 (UTC)  — Derekbyron (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Apparent WP:MEATPUPPET, possibly a WP:SOCKPUPPET; this user has only ever edited this AfD page, and the associated IP address has only edited this AfD page and the game article, but displays much alleged knowledge about the product. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  05:19, 13 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Why now? Because I just now found it. Orphaned "my cool product" would-be-articles like this often survive unnoticed for years. If I'd seen it the day it was created I would have nominated it for deletion then. Nothing personal.  I'm sure it's a fun game, it's just obviously not encyclopedically notable, any more than my old high school band was or my Web development consultancy is. See WP:OTHERSTUFF; the fact that articles on other arguably non-notable games exist is not a good argument for keeping this one. I may well nominate pitchnut and pichenotte for deletion, too. I have several encyclopedic works on games. If I don't find these games listed in them (and I'm sure I won't find Kineti-Go!) that's a good indication that they're junk articles. The main difference, however, is that they're articles about documented folk games with long histories (if possibly too-local ones), while this article is a promotional piece written by someone about the product they are marketing. Wikipedia is not a directory of companies and productss. See also WP:SPAM. It's not being nominated for deletion because "it's a product", but because it's a non-notable product that WP is being abused to market.  That someone some where might find it "educational" is a WP:ITSUSEFUL argument. The fact that you seem to know a whole lot about its alleged uses in education suggests you are closely connected with the company, since none of the weak sources cites so far go into such alleged uses. How — SMcCandlish    Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  03:54, 13 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. I'm finding no sources, valid or otherwise, that establish notability. - Jelly Soup (talk) 08:04, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Again, the sources are that establish notability are listed in the article. For some of the references, it will take some research away from your computer, but according to wikipedia, or any protocol on citing sources, sources that are not online are still considered valid and notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mstromberg (talk • contribs) 00:59, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No one said non-Internet sources aren't valid. The problem is that the ones you have for the product you're trying to market through Wikipedia are all trivial "human interest" mentions in local newspapers or mentions on people's personal gaming blogs. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  05:19, 13 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NCORP, WP:PRODUCT, WP:PROMO. An article focusing on the company could possibly be recreated in the future, if it meets WP:GNG. Such an article could include some brief (but not undue) mention of the games it sells. -- Trevj (talk) 15:13, 15 March 2012 (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.