Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Northern Crown (roleplaying game)


 * 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   no consensus.  Sandstein  08:37, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Northern Crown (roleplaying game)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable role playing game. Blowdart | talk 13:37, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. If we're going by relevance relative to other articles alone, a search for '"Northern Crown" d20' on Google returns about 23,200 hits, whereas searches on other articles not tagged for deletion (at the time I looked) in the d20 System category return far fewer: [Necrodice] at 139, [Uresia: Grave of Heaven] at 2,350, and [Arcana Unearthed|Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed] only returns 18,900. I would argue that most d20 gamers would consider Cook's work far more notable than this, and yet it receives noticably fewer hits. On its own, the game is notable for its themes in comparison to other roleplaying games and fantasy settings. While there are plenty of games set in the Wild West, I can't think of any others (not even console RPGs) set in the colonial era. so sayeth Lucky Number 49 Yell at me! 14:33, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Which one of those Google hits is a reliable, secondary source that addresses the topic directly in detail per WP:N? -- Explodicle (T/C) 14:50, 10 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh and I am going to go through the other articles as well; never fear ;) --Blowdart | talk 15:59, 10 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Bundle and Renom I just spoke with the author on his talk page. I think the rpg articles should be bundled and renommed. Currently the nom is running into issues with WP:JNN, and due to the motivations for deletion: WP:WAX and WP:ALLORNOTHING . HatlessAtless (talk) 17:46, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  20:45, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep: It is a published gaming book by a notable publisher, and in none of his mass RPG AfDs has nom tendered any explanation of why these games are not notable, either in the nominations or anywhere else, other than to say that he "has concerns."  RGTraynor  23:29, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Just because the publisher is notable does not mean everything they publish is notable. The number of AfDs the nom has made recently is irrelevant to this discussion. The burden of evidence is on those who think the topic is notable.
 * (I really do hope someone with the skill required bundles these so you and I won't have to copy-paste everything. :-P -- Explodicle (T/C) 07:23, 12 July 2008 (UTC))
 * The burden is upon a nominator to provide deletion grounds that at least have some measure of backing. I can't go around AfDing every article I don't like with a curt "non-notable" without explaining why I think they are, and then demand that others jump through hoops I won't even contemplate approaching.    RGTraynor  08:20, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * (I've continued this at Articles for deletion/OGL System. -- Explodicle (T/C) 14:53, 12 July 2008 (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.