Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nuclear Dawn (2nd nomination)


 * 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. WP:SNOW applies. (non-admin closure) Jovanmilic97 (talk) 22:55, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Nuclear Dawn
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

No reliable sources. Too many primary sources. Therefore fails Verifiability Nightvour (talk) 02:32, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Nightvour (talk) 02:32, 28 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep The notion that there are no reliable sources is patently false. There are 25 reviews on Metacritic including many from the most major gaming journalism outlets and magazines, like PC Gamer, Destructoid and Gamespot.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 12:25, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep There are enough reviews to justify the article. It's short, but it should be. Angryapathy (talk) 14:01, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep' per sources highlighted by Zxcvbnm. Notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article. Haleth (talk) 23:00, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - Per previous respondents. Dubious that WP:BEFORE has been adequately performed here. AFD is not cleanup. WP:SNOW may apply. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 16:40, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per the 25 critic reviews. Geschichte (talk) 19:29, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - with Metacritic sources suggested by Zxcvbnm, article seems to pass WP:VER. Videogameplayer99 (talk) 23:33, 30 May 2021 (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.