Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mumble-Jumble


 * 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 delete. Dennis Brown - 2&cent; 23:34, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Mumble-Jumble

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not a notable board game. Self-published, and the coverage is all exceedingly local in nature (of the form "Local man creates game") power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 22:08, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 09:14, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 13:29, 29 April 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * weak keep Sources are as the nom claims, but one of them is the Baltimore Sun. The game is hardly known, but there are enough WP:RS that are independent of the author to meet WP:N.  It's an interesting case of where we claim sources are too local to have value.  IMO, the  Baltimore Sun is enough to overcome the "smalltown press" arguments. Hobit (talk) 11:57, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 03:10, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete, source given by Hobit may still be local coverage since Lutherville is less than 15 miles away. – Laundry Pizza 03  ( d c&#x0304; ) 17:33, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Two points. #1 Baltimore is pretty darn big as is that newspaper.  One of the largest in the US I'd guess.  Might be in the top 100 in the world.  #2 I don't think "local" is a part of WP:N or any relevant SNGs.  So, from a policy-based viewpoint, I don't know that it matters either way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hobit (talk • contribs) 04:15, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Weak delete per WP:ONESOURCE. w umbolo   ^^^  13:46, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
 * There are quite a few sources in the article actually. Hobit (talk) 11:21, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete insufficient sources to pass WP:GNG. I'll acknowledge that part of the sourcing challenge is that the game was launched pre-Internet, but non-existent current coverage suggests any temporary notability was not sustained. I also noticed there are other games with the same name, which could confuse people looking to determine notability. TimTempleton (talk) (cont)  18:13, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete The references are old and non-clickable and hence cannot be verified. There are no recent references, so hence it is not notable IMO. Peter303x (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:52, 15 May 2018 (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.