Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Never shout Nevermind


 * 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   speedy delete. Speedy/Snow delete, as web content without any indication of importance. That it's only potential web content makes it even less acceptable. And as entirely promotional. CNN should be ashamed of itself.  DGG ( talk ) 05:31, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Never shout Nevermind

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Never Shout Nevermind, an upcoming video-game does not provide reliable sources to corroborate notability. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, something this article is. -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 11:04, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, per criteria 1 and 8 of WP:GAMECRUFT. Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 11:22, 6 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I completely agree that Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. It is unfair when someone puts unreliable sources on the encyclopedia. But this is listing information that has been gathered from two different sources, both of which have links included in the bottom. These sources can be read by either: A) clicking on the links provided on the article for Never shout Nevermind, or B) going to Google News and typing in the articles' title.
 * Furthermore, this article has just been created. Not more than a single day ago has it just been put on Wikipedia. Time and effort will be put into this article, and will not be ignored or left as-is. I've seen plenty of articles that have stated rumors of upcoming events and various other "speculation." Information that was gathered for this article come from separate News sites, both of which are reliable sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnsith (talk • contribs) 11:44, 6 January 2012 (UTC)  — Johnsith (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * strong delete - Neither of the news sources are "reliable sources". Both are services where a user can submit and get an article up by default, and it only gets taken down if someone calls for it to be moderated... this isn't the main CNN reporting, but the iReporter section (the report is branded "not vetted by CNN"), not the main KEYT but the YouNews section. Both articles were submitted yesterday (both by someone named "John" yesterday), so it appears to be a current promo push. --Nat Gertler (talk) 12:37, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Mourning Tide has recently been considered for deletion. From what I can tell they've been on for over 2 years on wikipedia yet that article is barely now being considered for deletion. Their only sources are myspace. Myspace is nothing but a promo push, and yet it's allowed to be used. A promo push and prividing information are two different things — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geoff9115 (talk • contribs) 13:38, 6 January 2012 (UTC)  — Geoff9115 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * If you're arguing that WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS, that's a failing argument; we don't hold off on improving Wikipedia because it is not yet perfect. If you wish to defend the article under discussion, it should be in terms of the article itself (and you're apt to have an uphill battle, given that it's about a non-existent video game featured in no reliable sources coming from a company that has never released anything.) --Nat Gertler (talk) 13:54, 6 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Once the game is released and gets some reviews it can can have an article. With projected release a year away it's way to soon. The way the games industry works release dates this far ahead are not to trusted. Tigerboy1966 (talk) 14:24, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. One of the contributors to the article has started posting to places such as Yahoo Answers, asking for people to come and vote in the discussion. I'm putting the "not a vote" tab at the top to let anyone coming in know that this is NOT decided on a vote. You must back up your arguments with legitimate reasons as to why the article should be kept. The #1 reason the article is up for AfD is because there aren't enough reliable sources to show that this game is notable for something that hasn't released yet and doesn't have a set release date. Like future films, un-released games that are still in production need an extraordinary amount of coverage to show that they're notable enough to warrant an article before their release.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 16:18, 6 January 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Delete. There is no coverage of this game, no reliable coverage that is. Of the sources given, it's very very obvious that both of them were written by the same person: John Yakotu, one of the creators of the game. In the iCNN reports, the coverage is written by "john9115" and the story is put out on a faction of CNN where users can create their own news stories and post them to what is the equivalent of a blog. The other site (keyt.com) has their posts written by a "JohnKeyt" and appears to be the same type of scenario: it's a site where users can write up their own content and add it. Both articles seem to have been written about the same time as the wikipedia article was, and I can't help but wonder if it was in response to the requirement for reliable coverage. This is probably one of the worst attempts to game the system that I've ever seen. I'm also reporting the two accounts that created the page. When someone goes out of their way to attempt to create their own news articles and pass them off as reliable sources, it's hard to see good faith in their actions. This is just pure spam advertising.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 16:29, 6 January 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Delete - not notable at this time - perhaps in a bit but not yet. Youreallycan (talk) 16:45, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Strong delete: Pure self-promotion. No evidence of notability. Sources provided are fake. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 16:47, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:N and WP:CRYSTAL. Wikipedia is not a place to promote your "upcoming" video game. Wait till it has been released and gathered enough independent comment to meet WP:42, and then leave someone uninvolved to write about it. JohnCD (talk) 17:27, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - Isn't this a garden-variety WP:CSD? Frank  &#124;  talk  18:17, 6 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Snowball delete - clearly non-notable, per WP:GAMECRUFT and WP:CRYSTAL ukexpat (talk) 18:21, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, obviously - non-notable, promotional, meat-puppetry, faking sources, etc -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:32, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Game over No more continues left. In otherwords, delete. Wildthing61476 (talk) 18:42, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - non notable at present time. Can be recreated if meets at a later date. Edinburgh   Wanderer  19:01, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Later - Why not just delete it, i mean when it comes then it comes out, you clearly have a lot of time left. try again later no big whoop.Danny 310 (talk) 19:40, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 20:08, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 20:08, 6 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - references insufficient to be notable. hmssolent\Let's convene 01:43, 7 January 2012 (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.