Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kings of Chaos (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.  MBisanz  talk 06:50, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Kings of Chaos (game)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete lots of ghits but nothing like a RS showing real-world notability. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep leads to a number of articles, including  from the washingtonpost.  I assume it's the same game. Hobit (talk) 22:59, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * This search seems to narrow things down. The same report is repeated four times in different publications. There's also a name-dropping here, but it doesn't count for much. SharkD (talk) 03:55, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete The above article, is, just one article. Establishing notability requires multiple articles, as per WP:WEB --Peephole (talk) 17:52, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The point of the first link was that there are a number of sources. Times of India even mentions the game for example. .  Plenty of sources.  Hobit (talk) 02:17, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment The Times Of India makes no more than a passing mention. I went through some of the links you provided through google news, and most of them weren't about the game. --Peephole (talk) 14:42, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete It appears most of the other sources are either non-reliable (forum discussions, etc) or talking about a generic title, "Kings of Chaos". The only other article from a reliable source is The Age and that's a reprint of the Washington Post's article. ZappyGun  (talk to me)  What I've done for Wikipedia  14:45, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I guess it depends whether a single report counts more if it is repeated in multiple journals, though I doubt this is the case. SharkD (talk) 18:18, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 00:13, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:59, 25 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak keep per the spirit of WP:PRESERVE. There appears to have been some reporting on this, but at this time it is rather weak and sporadic. There is no deadline though and this may be a notable game, but the article requires work. Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 14:20, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Until it can be proven to be notable, it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. ZappyGun (talk to me)  What I've done for Wikipedia  15:31, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Per coverage in Washington Post. Let's start deleting NES and Atari games because people will have a hard time finding digital sources on those. Frantically scramble to save a notable subject, my puppets! 216.37.86.10 (talk) 21:49, 30 January 2009 (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.