Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Post-obsolescence Commodore 64 projects


 * 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.  Sandstein  08:55, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Post-obsolescence Commodore 64 projects

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article seems to be written like an advertisement. The subject alone doesn't seem to be notable either to separate it from the Commodore 64 article. I found a few reliable sources upon a quick Google search on the Commodore 64 homebrew scene but I don't think it's enough coverage to establish general notability and it's only worthy of a short sub-section in its parent subject's article at best. letcreate123 (talk) 05:27, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. letcreate123 (talk) 05:27, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * delete under WP:TNT. I'm not sure this could even make for a standalone article, as this could be covered in the main article, but it's current state needs a complete overwrite for it to meet policies. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:50, 13 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete any information here should be within the main commodore 64 article. I don't think there's articles for any other retro consoles emulations Seasider91 (talk) 17:02, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * C64 seems to be the main retro target for e.g. new games. But I would be very happy for someone to make an similar article for e.g. the Amiga. Thue (talk) 21:58, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * keep as main author of article. The claim that there is no reliable sources is false. For example from the New York Times: A Toy With a Story For Game Makers, Inspiration In the Soul of an Old Machine (and these were not hard to find). The C64 Direct-to-TV sold 70,000 units on its first day, so new retro hardware for the C64 is quite popular. Just for game publishing, there are multiple publishers publishing new C64 games - surely that qualifies for an article. Thue (talk) 21:57, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete The article creator needs to learn the difference between a reliable source and an unreliable one. Even if it is notable enough, it needs to be WP:TNT and rewritten to comply with Wikipedia standards.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 22:13, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * You do not think New York Times which I linked is a reliable source? Thue (talk) 22:15, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I think that all the sources in the article are dubious since they are either WP:PRIMARY or unreliable (not to mention incorrectly formatted). A couple of NY Times articles will not prove independent notability over something that could merely be added to Commodore 64 main article.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 22:17, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep The New York Times article, etc, prove it meets the general notability guidelines just fine.  D r e a m Focus  01:44, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:TNT. The NYT source is nice, but the article itself is almost entirely written according to fansites, and honestly the article reads like something that a fansite would host. It should be greatly trimmed/streamlined and put into the main article - a spin out is unnecessary. Sergecross73   msg me  11:49, 16 July 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.