Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Knight Online


 * 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  - Four contributors were satisfied that notability was demonstrated, one was surprised that more sources had not been added, and one did not accept that the sources demonstrated notability. The consensus was that this is a notable subject. (non-admin) S HEFFIELD S TEEL TALK 20:25, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Knight Online

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

Notability in question since May '07, fails WP:V as well. Wizardman 14:57, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game related deletions. MrKIA11 (talk) 15:11, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - Being the #4 MMORPG in the world cuts it for me, regardless of anything else. Even if the numbers are a bit off mark, #4 plus or minus two would still make this topic notable. User:Krator (t c) 23:00, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Neutral - Seeing the position the game is in and the hits I'm getting off of Google, I'm having trouble understanding why it is no one thought to add in the easily located information required for WP:V. I'm inclined to agree with Krator. -- Jelly Soup (talk) 23:41, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete — Article is not encyclopedic in nature. It is written like an advertisement as well as a game guide. MuZemike (talk) 00:04, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. Those are reasons to clean-up not to delete. Banj e  b oi   12:40, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I will add that this article lacks verifiable, third-party sources that establish notability. Just because users claim that the game is popular or big does not demonstrate notability. Appropriate sources must verify that. MuZemike (talk) 18:46, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Although the article has many flaws, it's not enough reason for deletion. Notability is rock solid. -- Mr Stalker  ( talk ) 09:33, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Sources that establish said "rock solid notability?" MuZemike (talk) 20:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. Notability is clear. -- DS1953 talk  23:20, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. 8.91% of MMORPG market share is amply sufficient for notability. GregorB (talk) 22:43, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I disagree. See WP:BIGNUMBER. It's the sources, not size that determines notability. MuZemike (talk) 18:46, 11 August 2008 (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.