Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monster Trux: Arenas


 * 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. --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 10:02, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Monster Trux: Arenas

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

No references or sources listed in the article and is a stub. The only notable thing about this game is that it was made by Data Design Interactive (already nominated by another user for deletion), who is infamous for making games that receive very negative reception.  Nilocla  ♈ ☮ 01:38, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:53, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions.  —• Gene93k (talk) 01:53, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep but merge really bad game with horrible reviews still meets WP:N. Please follow WP:BEFORE.  That said all the games in this series should probably be in the same article.  The reviews indicate they are all basically the same game afterall.    are valid reviews and thus sources. Hobit (talk) 03:04, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep The fact that the company article has been nominated for deletion (consensus there appears to be 'keep' in any case) has no bearing on the notability of this game. Neither does a negative reception. A notability tag informing interested users of the need to improve references might be more appropriate. Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 09:29, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Week keep Some reliable source coverage, like . OK, it seems to be shovelware to make a quick buck. Unfortunately, that's speculative (IGN review does this) so merging would need better reasoning/sourcing. —  HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 09:54, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Not really, a merge to the publisher is an editorial decision. If consensus is that this is the right thing to do, we do it. Hobit (talk) 12:44, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * How many reviews actually call these games shovelware from each other? If you are to merge them all into one article, you'd need to say why these particular games are presented together. And that would need to be sourced. Alas, I see only one source saying this, hence this borders on OR and speculation. Merge if you can, I am pro preserving content, but as long as it's backed up by published refs. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 13:12, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * We have games merged by publisher all the time. No RS is required for that, it's an editorial call. Hobit (talk) 07:19, 4 September 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.