Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Psycho Killer (video game) (2nd nomination)


 * 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 merge to Delta 4. After discarding the sock arguments, it looks like the bulk of the arguments favours a selective merge to the developer article owing to a scarcity of GNG-usable sources. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:36, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Psycho Killer (video game)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article has previously been deleted: Articles for deletion/Psycho Killer (video game). I'm not particularly familiar with Notability (video games) criteria, but my impression is that "significant coverage" is lacking. – wbm1058 (talk) 22:22, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. wbm1058 (talk) 22:22, 8 September 2018 (UTC) *

*Strong Keep. The article contains 3 reliable secondary sources, which are all reviews from gaming magazines, which were very popular at the time. This passes WP:GNG. The Duke Talk page, please ping me anywhere else. 22:42, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I see only three secondary sources. --Izno (talk) 01:51, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Merge to developer. I see three reviews, each a paragraph long. That wouldn't be enough to do justice to the topic without resorting to primary sources. Summarize the essence within the parent article. If more sources show up in the future, can always split summary style. The reviews:
 * https://archive.org/stream/amigaformatmagazine-032/Amiga_Format_Issue_032_1992_03_Future_Publishing_GB#page/n26/mode/1up
 * https://archive.org/stream/amigaformat39/AmigaFormat039-Oct92#page/n37/mode/1up/
 * https://archive.org/stream/Amiga_Joker_1991-10_Joker_Verlag_DE#page/n57/mode/1up/
 * Couldn't find "Amiga Magazine". Is it supposed to be "CU Amiga Magazine"? If so, here's issue #19 but didn't see the title in the ToC.
 * (not watching, please )  czar  11:14, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

* I have sorted out your comments about "Amiga Magazine". I have a question though, this article contains 4 magazine reviews for the CDTV port of the game. Is that enough for notability? Thank you. The Duke Talk page, please ping me anywhere else. 14:03, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
 * It's less about count than whether we can do justice to the topic based on that sourcing. These "reviews" are each barely a paragraph long. Everything that needs to be said about the game (based on secondary sourcing) can fit in two paragraphs within the parent/dev article. That's how I would cover it until more sources with greater depth on the topic are uncovered. czar  19:33, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: User:The Duke of Nonsense has been indentified as a sockpuppet of User:HowToDoLife. &#91;Username Needed&#93; 11:07, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

I have struck the comments by the page creator as they were evading a block. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:06, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep certainly it's on the very low end of meeting GNG, but a merge would be UNDUE for the game developer since they appear to have developed several notable games. Even if the article is reduced to two paragraphs, that is enough for a separate article  Galobtter (pingó mió) 20:14, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Then merge proportionately? We judge whether separate articles are needed based not on how many paragraphs we can theoretically write but on the amount of source content. In this case, the game has a small paragraph overview in four games magazines. By no measure is that significant coverage. czar  01:49, 15 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. Meets minimum RS requirements. Phediuk (talk) 05:37, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
 * How? czar  12:31, 15 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Merge to developer per czar. JOE BRO  64  14:20, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Selective merge per czar as an alternative to deletion. Such short reviews are hardly enough to hang a whole article on, but we can reflect the information in the developer page. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 23:26, 15 September 2018 (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.