Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MindPlay


 * 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) Perhaps a future Afd in case the article does not get improved. Right now, the minimal consensus seems to be for keeping the article.   ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪    ―Œ  ♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣  05:30, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

MindPlay

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

I do not believe the subject has "significant coverage" per the notability guidelines me_and (talk) 14:49, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:29, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:29, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article has citations for coverage in USAToday and Wired magazine, both recognized mainstream news sources. SpikeJones (talk) 21:40, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * After a good-faith search yesterday, the only two articles I could find covering MindPlay were the USAToday and Wired ones, dated 2004-02-11 and 2003-08-18. Considering notability is not temporary, and in particular "it takes more than just routine news reports about a single event or topic to constitute significant coverage", I do not think this is sufficient to establish notability. In particular, I do not believe notability of the news source automatically confers notability of topics that source covers. --me_and (talk) 09:35, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * After searching again, I've come across a little more coverage; the most recent being this, updated May 2005. That's the most recent mention I can readily find, and I stand by my original point that the coverage is sufficiently small, and sufficiently isolated to a small period of time, that WP:SIGCOV isn't satisfied. --me_and (talk) 09:52, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:36, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Sourcing in article seems enough to meet WP:N. Don't think small period of time or the like is relevant. Hobit (talk) 15:34, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Addendum to earlier KEEP vote: Have added NYTimes article to list of references on the Mindplay page as another example of coverage received in mainstream media. SpikeJones (talk) 00:41, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * keep I believe this article with this reference meets the notability. also I think this is a good point to keep this article for future improvement. mamali (talk) 09:01, 13 August 2010 (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.