Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mario Forever/Archive1


 * 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 of the debate was keep. Flowerparty ☀ 07:24, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Mario Forever
Non-notable fan game. Delete. A Link to the Past (talk) 21:07, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * As much as I HATE articles about fan-made games (although I do like some of said games), and while I would certainly AfD the majority of games in the "fanmade computer game remakes and sequels" category, I have to vote weak keep. Although it could use a little copy editing, the article contains NPOV info and has an external link to a review from Acid-Play, which is a huge site in the realm of freeware games (and has an Alexa rank of 28,847). Googling "mario forever"+"buziol games" brings up a considerable number of both total hits (11,100) and unique hits (338). The game definitely a tenuous claim to notability, but for me, it's enough. -- Kicking222 22:12, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete I HATE articles about fan-made games. ;) Danny Lilithborne 22:12, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Per Kicking222, seems notable enough. Just because it's indepentant, doesn't mean there shouldn't be an article about it. - Tomodachigai
 * Keep It's an important game to Mario fans who own PC's, so I say keep it. TheDingbat 00:27, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep In my opinion, this article fits to Wikipedia standards. It is informative, neutral and has no problems with deletion policy. Personally for me it was useful. And yeah, I suppose "I HATE articles about fan-made games"  is not the best argument, don't you think so? 194.85.80.92 17:39, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Neither is being informative. Being informative and neutral does not counter the fact that it's not a very notable subject. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:48, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Additionally, I've noticed that many of the voters here do not have very many edits on Wikipedia. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:48, 27 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletions.   -- ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk  to Nihonjo e  18:04, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per discussion above. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjo e  18:04, 30 May 2006 (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.