Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kingory


 * 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.  Sandstein  10:47, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Kingory

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unsourced article about an online game, tagged for notability since 2010. I can’t find any sources that would support notability. Mccapra (talk) 22:57, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 22:57, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 22:57, 24 August 2019 (UTC)


 * ,, each look likely to be reliable.  The last one is more than just a review.  There appear to be plenty of other RS reviews out there.  So keep for now, but I'll be happy to defer to a video game expert who can explain why those don't count toward WP:N (I don't know much about that area). Hobit (talk) 01:05, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment Thanks Hobit. Like you I’m not sure what would generally be accepted as RS in this domain. My assumption was that more or less every game released would get an initial review on gaming sites, but in looking for something more solid perhaps I was setting the threshold too high. Mccapra (talk) 04:31, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. The only one of those sources that's reliable for notability purposes is the Engadget review. Gameranks.com isn't mentioned at WP:VG/RS, and that page is hardly a review - it's more of a game guide, and those aren't really indicative of notability considering anyone can and will write one. Gamasutra is reliable, but that article is an interview; interviews don't contribute to notability because they aren't secondary sources. It's not enough to maintain an article. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 07:32, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Those three were literally the first 3 hits I got on Google that looked even vaguely useful. There are tons more.  Did you WP:BEFORE here or just look at the three I, a random passerby, found in 20 seconds?  In any case, a game guide certainly does help with WP:N.  While we aren't a game guide, a detailed overview of a game, much like a detailed overview of anything else, certainly is helpful when writing an article. Hobit (talk) 13:36, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment As you say there are other links that come up in a google source. From memory they were mostly discussion forums and dumps of a user guide. However there was nothing that looked to me like sustained coverage in reliable independent sources.  Thanks Mccapra (talk) 16:03, 31 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete (and possibly Draftify if anyone is willing to work on developing the page). In its current state the article is essentially 100% WP:OR. From what Hobit writes above I do think there is a decent chance that a more thorough search could uncover better references and that the subject could pass WP:GNG. But such references are not in evidence at the moment, and the current WP:OR version of the article looks unsalvageable to me. Nsk92 (talk) 20:53, 31 August 2019 (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.