Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pixel Gun 3D: Battle Royale


 * 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. -- Scott Burley (talk) 21:36, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Pixel Gun 3D: Battle Royale

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Only one of the provided references is independent of the subject— that reference calls this app "one of the most popular apps in the Android ecosystem", which seems odd since a Google News search turns up no actual discussion of the subject (though many trivial mentions). I suspect this means the subject is not sufficiently notable to warrant a Wikipedia article. A loose necktie (talk) 01:56, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:04, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Speedy redirect: All sources from own wikia, does not prove notability. I wrote a new one though, so I guess we can redirect to mine. Please help out!   Oshawott 12  ==== Talk to me!  07:52, 9 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment. Huh, never realized how little coverage this game actually has. The game has over 50 million downloads from Google Play alone however, so please bear that in mind. Mosaicberry (talk) 13:13, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Speedy redirect to Pixel Gun 3D per CoolSkittle, didn't see that. Mosaicberry (talk) 12:29, 10 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Speedy redirect to Pixel Gun 3D, which is an article of much better quality created by Oshawott 12. CoolSkittle  (talk) 01:44, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
 * ...Is it...? It’s barely a paragraph, and has 6 sources that I’ve never heard of, that look like they are of dubious quality... Sergecross73   msg me  16:52, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Could we move any of the information from the Pixel Gun 3D: Battle Royale page to the new Pixel Gun 3D page before it gets deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smith John Mr. (talk • contribs) 19:55, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment There's some bad procedural-ness going on here. The article has originally been deleted under the name Pixel Gun 3D 3 times as G1, G11, and G11. (I'm not counting a R2 due to a draft move). Smith John created it under a new name, which is probably innocent enough. Moving a separate draft to Pixel Gun 3D while an AFD on the topic is already underway is probably premature and a bit out of procedure. AFD should be evaluating the topics suitably for an article. Votes for speedy redirect should be clarified as Keeps so its clear you're indicating you believe the topic passes WP:GNG. -- ferret (talk) 11:44, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I wasn’t aware that that this article was created, so the draft was moved to Pixel Gun 3D. However, my article was made to be the passing one. I’m confused as though what happens if we change to keep, though. Will my article be moved here, or will that article redirect to mine? The topic passes WP:GNG, but this article’s sources doesn’t work. I did try to nominate this for speedy delete, but this deletion discussion was already in place.   Oshawott 12  ==== Talk to me!  11:52, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * You literally voted on this AFD, then moved your Draft to mainspace....... You were fully aware. Vote "Keep, but redirect", if you want, but what needs evaluated is whether "Pixel Gun 3D" is a notable topic, not whether one article is better than the other. -- ferret (talk) 11:56, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 10:57, 16 April 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - I’m not seeing the third party reliable source coverage necessary to meet the WP:GNG. Actively against the redirect suggested above as well - that should be deleted as well, as that also hasn’t been established as notable. (It’s the same thing under a different name.) Sergecross73   msg me  22:00, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,   Oshawott 12  ==== Talk to me!  15:15, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete both this and Pixel Gun 3D since they are about the same subject. I just don't see how this video game meets WP:GNG in any case. My WP:BEFORE brought me this but that by itself is not enough (and the source is just listed as situational per WP:VG/RS). There is a big reaching over here to make this game notable, but it is not. Speedy redirect !votes should be discounted as they do not discuss the notability of the subject, just like  has said. Analyzing the references from Pixel Gun 3D:
 * 1) A information about the number of downloads, but not a secondary source.
 * 2) A rehash of a press release, and comes from an unreliable website (no staff even listed).
 * 3) A single paragraph included which is: "To get started you can customize your character with a few Minecraft skins to choose from. Next you will pick which game mode you want to play. The options include Survival, Deathmatch, and Co-op. Each mode can have up to 10 people competing against one another online. Like any good shoot-em-up game there are a variety of maps and weapons to choose from. You can even create your own “server” for a game." I don't see editorial policy for this page, but the staff is listed. Either way, not WP:SIGCOV.
 * 4) Seems like an unreliable page as well. No staff listed, and the depth of the (short) coverage is as same as 3).
 * 5) WP:PRIMARY interview with the developer of the game. Does not count towards WP:GNG.
 * 6) Translating it through Google, it has 1 paragraph that says nothing about the game except "it is a charming game"/"test it and reply down in the comments if you like it or not", while rehashing features from the press release after. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 08:48, 22 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Note to closing admin - this probably looks more complicated than it is. We’ve got two delete !votes due to the lack of reliable sources. And two people who want to redirect the subject...to itself. Essentially a “keep and rename”. But there’s no valid keep argument presented, nor any arguments presented that it meets the WP:GNG. Sergecross73   msg me  14:39, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete due to a lack of notability mostly explained by others above; very little information can be found about this subject by searching. Redirecting is also a poor option for the same reasons. Geolodus (talk) 18:47, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - this article just doesn't seem to pass WP:GNG. Videogameplayer99 (talk) 07:19, 28 April 2019 (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.