Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PlayableGames


 * 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. I will userfy the article upon request. MelanieN (talk) 02:04, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

PlayableGames

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG. Looking through the custom Google WP:VG/RS search engine, there are three results. Does not merit its own article. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 15:20, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions.  soetermans . ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 15:22, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete per nom. There also isn't much about them indicating notability through regular Google. - Iago Qnsi (talk) 15:37, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  19:55, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep Move to Draft - it has received coverage in the form of interviews at the video-game specialist sites Market for Home Computing and Video Games and Gamasutra, both listed as reliable sources at WP:VG/RS. Diego (talk) 11:34, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I hate to use that word, but that is literally a total of two sources. How does that meet WP:GNG? soetermans . ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 12:19, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Because they are in-depth and come from separate reliable sources which are independent of the subject. That is enough material to write a short article with reliable content, which is what notability is about. Diego (talk) 13:36, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I've reviewed with more care the Gamasutra source, and it happens to mention PlayableGames only in passing; I thought the testing process it describes was specific to that group, but it is general. That content would be better suited for an article dedicated to Usability testing in video games. I've changed my not-vote, it makes more sense to move the article to Draft per WP:PRESERVE (the references should not be deleted as they could be used in such article). Diego (talk) 13:45, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:26, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete and Draft and Userfy if needed. SwisterTwister   talk  05:59, 21 March 2016 (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.