Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PangYa


 * 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 - hahnch  e  n 02:35, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

PangYa

 * — (View AfD)

non-notable golf game. no reference to prove this game is notable. The Uber Ninja 14:54, 27 December 2006 (UTC) — The Uber Ninja (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Keep At the very least, PangYa is the basis for the Nintendo Wii game, Super Swing Golf. Super Swing Golf is notable, and PangYa would be considered notable because of that. Furthermore, I find it unlikely that there are absolutely no references available to cite PangYa's notability. Just because the editors have not cited them doesn't mean they don't exist. I do know that PangYa is quite popular, but the references needed might not be in English. 206.213.251.31 20:53, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

"'Correct'" me if im wrong but does the fact that Super Swing Golf was created, which in fact is an off-line version of albatross12 season 2, not mean that PangYa is itself notable. After reading this i did a quick google search and found quite a bit of infromation pretaining to this game considering it is the only game of its kind. Though most of the sites, as mentioned above are not in English.

Keep Pangya is a popular online multiplayer game, voted one of the most prolific downloads by Cnet in 2006. It clearly hurts no-one by having an article on wikipedia, nor is it irrelevant. Is this deletion discussion actually relevant in the least? Honestly.. --Unidiode

Weak Keep The game is relatively notable, but it's not proven in the article. Fix it, and I say the article stays. -Ryanbomber 01:49, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Keep Do remember Wikipedia's policy is to provide a world view. Just because there's lack of english site, with plenty of Korean sites, it's still relevant. That, and the fact that Super Swing Golf is here, means it should stay. George Leung 03:02, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and Cleanup It needs to have its notability established and a clean-up can easily do this. Kyaa the Catlord 13:39, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. PresN 18:22, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * keep I agree this is notable, especially if Nintendo is making a console spinoff. &mdash; brighterorange  (talk) 00:08, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Keep This game is hugely popular yet there are few resources of information about it on the internet. A deletion of this article would eliminate one of the most useful and unbiased explanations of the game.

Keep The hell? This game is has thousands of people playing it, why wouldn't it deserve a page? It has even been translated and licensed in other countries. This deletion crap is retarded, seriously.

Comment Everyone says it's notable but do u have any source to prove it? The Uber Ninja 02:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment: I've saved a copy at Wikiasite:gameinfo:PangYa in case it is deleted from here. Angela. 19:43, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Keep This is a game that is quite popular, and has been growing in popularity over time. Some internet Cafes in english speaking countries are even starting to hold PangYa events. Enigmar 21:00, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep: Nom fails to assert why the game is not notable. Research either way by the nom would provide a conclusion. If the article is lacking, tag it as such or fix it. AfD is not cleanup.Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 03:18, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep and Cleanup: I am inclined to believe that TUN has never touched the game itself before when making this seemingly ridiculous (but otherwise quite reasonable) assertion. As thus far there had been no clear explanation to its popularity, that much is noted and is something most of us would concede to. However, that said, it does not mean that this article is entirely worthless and should thus be deleted. As CyberSkull says, cleanup and deletion are two entirely different things. However, the article itself still requires more cleanup than what has already been done, the main thing being that it sounds more like a source article than an encyclopaedic one. Pasonia 11:47, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The article is just full of funcraft and what not. there's not even a single reference. I'd say this is a advertisement more then a article. The Uber Ninja 20:12, 31 December 2006 (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.