Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Major League Baseball (video 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.  Sandstein  09:35, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Major League Baseball (video game)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article fails to establish any kind of notability. The only reviews present are ones from Allgame and Nintendo Power, but as others have pointed out NP barely talks about the game, instead just comparing it to other baseball games on the NES. Could find nothing else on either MobyGames or the Wayback Machine. Namcokid 47  (Contribs) 17:38, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 17:57, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 17:57, 21 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep One of the first MLB-licensed games for the NES; searching for "Major League Baseball" + "LJN" would for sure find more sources.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 19:52, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
 * And how many of those come from reliable sources? Its historical importance is not an argument to keep something if there exists little to no sources for it. Namcokid  47  (Contribs) 21:00, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Currently undecided, but did you seriously just left the search term (as a WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES classic case) without you doing your own proper research to keep (or you think the nominator didn't do that which is a failure of WP:AGF since you said "would for sure find more")? Whatever the case is, it's bad. The search term just manages to find two press releases (in reliable sources, but still PR) about the lawsuit by a 9 year old where the game is barely mentioned. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 22:26, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment If there's a questionable or too broad title, it certainly isn't a bad thing to suggest good Boolean searches to the nominator to help them out (I've done this many times without any objection). The game was a wide-selling NES game, thus I feel it easily merits a keep.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 05:28, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Sales figures do not make something automatically notable. Namcokid  47  (Contribs) 17:20, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment I found a ref in Bleacher Report and a book ref /. Will try to find more if I can, but I would advocate a merge to a bigger article about MLB video games as whole. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 22:37, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep was noted as one of the best selling video games of 1988 by the LA Times (added to article.) Very difficult to search for given the title, but it does get mentioned in books and a "review" from Golf Digest in 2018 . I don't know how to search period magazines, but I'd be shocked if this wasn't notable. SportingFlyer  T · C  22:59, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Brief mentions in other sources do not make something notable. Namcokid  47  (Contribs) 23:05, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Some of those sources aren't brief, including one of the books. It's been notable enough to be reviewed by a major newspaper again as a NES baseball game in 2018, I can't search period magazines, but I have to assume period reviews would be available if it was one of the best selling games per retailers/the LA Times source. SportingFlyer  T · C  23:11, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 14:31, 28 December 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   19:17, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Eh. Sources found above are close to the GNG bar. I can't see the LA times article, but it looks like there was a capsule review of this?  The Golf Digest one isn't great (basically a whiny capsule review) either.  But given it's still be written about and how hard it is to search for, and it was on the NES and sold well, there are certainly detailed contemporaneous reviews out there.  So basically "just at the bar of GNG and darn good reason to believe there is plenty of coverage out there".  weak keep. Hobit (talk) 06:07, 7 January 2020 (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.