Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Las Vegas (board 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. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 00:39, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Las Vegas (board game)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No sources supplied that indicate the notability of the game. There is a link to BoardGameGeek.com but they provide a listings for all games and is not sufficient by itself to establish notability. The game does to appear to have won a prestigious award for boardgames but it's not clear that this is sufficient to establish notability either. What is lacking right now is significant coverage by independent and secondary reliable sources. What makes it difficult is that with a name like "Las Vegas" it is difficult to wade through all the false positives to find this significant coverage if it exists. Nonetheless, as of now there is not enough currently in the article to establish notability. I would suggest redirecting to the creator of the game or the publisher as both have articles but glancing at those articles there are some notability issues there as well. SQGibbon (talk) 16:09, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:26, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:26, 4 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment As one of the three nominees for best boardgame of 2012 in the most prestigious board game award (Spiel des Jahres) it almost certainly has a LOT of coverage, though much of it is probably in German. A group of about a dozen journalists pick the nominees, so it's likely _they_ have covered it.  That said, we need sources and the name makes it hard to search for. Hobit (talk) 04:13, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I can't read some of this and have problems judging the sources (due to language issues) but (newspaper coverage),  (looks reliable), Spiel des Jahres nomiation.  More potential RSes at .  Hobit (talk) 08:56, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep the newspaper article listed above is very solid. The nomination certainly counts as a second RS.  And there seem to be a number of other RSes.  Hobit (talk) 08:56, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Hobit. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:45, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment from nominator: While it looks like the game might be notable it's difficult to tell if these are reliable sources as at least some of them appear to be gaming sites not unlike Boardgamegeek.com. Can someone choose a couple of these that they are reasonable sure are reliable and provide significant coverage? SQGibbon (talk) 13:56, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * The newspaper coverage (linked above) seems to be stellar coverage. And the nomination is clearly fine (if short).  I can't tell you much about the rest as I can't easily judge how reliable a source is in a language I can't read.  But those two by themselves are enough for WP:N. Hobit (talk) 16:38, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 10:39, 16 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment - Here are the sources I found with relatively little effort. Many of them may not be terribly reliable (I can't tell since most are in German). I just verified (with the exception of those couple I couldn't access) that for each of them (a) the content is a review or otherwise not just a brief mention, press release, or ad, and (b) that this game was the primary subject of each. There are a lot:
 * Sources: Ratgeberspiel (linked/quoted in the German Wikipedia article), opinionatedgamers (meh), subject of a podcast episode (meh), actually several podcasts so this is the last one I'll link (meh), fox affiliate story (hmm seems broken), Brettspiele-report, cliquenabend, gamesweplay (for some reason filtered on the public wifi I'm on), superfred, hall9000, ludoversum, malz-spiele, mikes gaming, die poeppelkiste, spielkult, spiel mit mir (another one filtered by local router!?), spiele akademie, spielenswert, spieletest, spielmonster, topolino, 2d6. Looks like an iPhone app was more recently released, too: app of the day, interview with the developer at GDC2013, pocket tactics (meh), rpggeek review. --&mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  |  20:47, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - Per sources linked above, passes GNG. --&mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  |  20:48, 21 June 2014 (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.