Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Project Starfighter


 * 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   no consensus. Cirt (talk) 19:00, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Project Starfighter

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Possibly non-notable software. Can't find any independent third-party sources, except for brief synopses on games directories. Psychonaut (talk) 22:54, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this game. Joe Chill (talk) 22:58, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  —  Gongshow  Talk 00:58, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. Nifboy (talk) 01:10, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak keep per some independent reviews: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; etc. LotLE × talk  20:34, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Some of those reviews are on blogs and forum posts, which are generally not reliable sources establishing notability. Others are on gaming websites, though I'm not familiar enough with them to know if they're acceptable sources.  Perhaps someone with more experience in gaming publishing could have a look. —Psychonaut (talk) 17:49, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Pretty weak keep. This is an old Linux game. There are a couple of pages about it in this obscure book, a paragraph in a Maximum PC round-up, a review on a download page here. The only in-depth review is here. Pcap ping  11:00, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Riksweeney (talk) 12:34, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect and list at Linux gaming. Verifiable (per Pcap's links), but not notable. Marasmusine (talk) 17:36, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Enough sources have been posted here to establish notability, and there is enough content here that it would hurt Wikipedia to loose it.Comrade Hamish Wilson (talk) 00:54, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep The sources not only seem to make it verifiable but notable as well.Comrade Graham (talk) 20:57, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - I have added more sources, some from sites notable enough to have their own article/sections. Its popularity is also shown by how Fedora artwork contributors and package maintainers are willing to edit it back to total freedom rather than just scrap it, if any of this helps. Comrade Graham (talk) 07:58, 2 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete The only reliable source cited in the article is Maximum PC's paltry 4 sentences, the book found by PCAP may or may not contain useful data but without an article basis to add it to it's not going to achieve anything alone. There's not enough here to verify more than a stub, nor is notability established through multiple, reliable, non-trivial sources. Someoneanother 23:37, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - If there's no further support for a redirect, I'll have to side with delete. Marasmusine (talk) 10:17, 31 January 2010 (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.