Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qore (PlayStation Network)


 * 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   keep.  Soxred  93  21:58, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Qore (PlayStation Network)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

There is not enough notable information on the service to require an article. All the encyclopaedic information is already on the PlayStation Store page and is a good size.  ChimpanzeeUK  - User | Talk | Contribs 14:32, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game related deletions. Pinkkeith (talk) 15:17, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete already covered better at PlayStation Store. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  16:33, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - all of the relevant information is already (better) covered in PlayStation Store. False information on the Qore page too - I first corrected a sentence that claimed it was presented in 1080p HD (it's 720p) and now I see it being listed as Remote Play capable when it's not. SeanMooney (talk) 17:28, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep The article was just recently created, give the editor(s) some time to expand on the content. --Pinkkeith (talk) 20:25, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment It might be better to tag that the article needs more references. --Pinkkeith (talk) 20:36, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep There are more than sufficient independent, tertiary sources discussing the various aspects of this service to justify an article. If anything, the Qore material should be cut back in the PlayStation Store article and spun out into this one. At worst, this is a redirect to PlayStation Store, making it not an AFD issue. Really, whether this should be in a separate article, or in the related PlayStation Store article, is a content issue that would be best discussed on the talk page of each article. Also per WP:DEMOLISH and Pinkkeith - the article was created on 4 June and has been regularly edited since, although don't expect that to continue while the AFD is underway (per WP:BITE). Debate   木  01:12, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I spent my time reviewing it! Over time, there WILL be more information! They barely had ONE episode out! Give it atleast 5 more episodes! Untraceable2U (talk) 03:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment As I mentioned above, because there is so little content on the service, I think it should be kept to the PlayStation Store article. If, over time, so much is added that it becomes too big, then this article should be re-created. At the moment, everything noteworthy on the topic is in the PlayStation Store article so there is no need for this new one. ChimpanzeeUK  - User | Talk | Contribs 06:57, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * "no need for a new article" is not grounds for nominating something for AFD, per WP:DEL. Debate   木  07:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * That's not what I meant. I am questioning the article's notability. I don't believe the service is notable enough to warrant an article. This is illustrated by the fact that the service can be adequately covered in a section on another article.  ChimpanzeeUK  - User | Talk | Contribs 07:15, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * That's not what I meant. I am questioning the article's notability. I don't believe the service is notable enough to warrant an article. This is illustrated by the fact that the service can be adequately covered in a section on another article.  ChimpanzeeUK  - User | Talk | Contribs 07:15, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment To the people who suggest expanding the article, what else could possibly be added? Qore does not do reviews, so there's no editorial staff or review philosophy sections. There can be no history section as it's brand new etc etc.... there is not enough content that could be added at the moment to justify it's own article. SeanMooney (talk) 08:13, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * A short article is still an article. Once the question of notability is decided the length of the article is essentially irrelevant. Not every article can be several pages long. Regardless, the obvious avenue of expansion is what other people think about the show, therefore reviews about the the success/failure/entertainment-value of Sony's venture are relevant here, , . It's also an early implementation in terms of the technology as, arguably, a new media distribution format launching on an existing, highly successful platform, the PlayStation . There are also corporate implications in terms of income and advertising dollars generated , as well as the reaction of PlayStation owners . I would suggest that these references alone should be more than sufficient, per WP:Web, to support the retention of this as a stand-alone article. Debate   木  08:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * We shouldn't have an article based on the assumption that the service will become more notable at some point in the future. The initial reception of the service is reported in the PlayStation Store article already and the other information you suggest could be included in this article isn't available yet (financial benefit, success/failure, etc).  ChimpanzeeUK  - User | Talk | Contribs 09:52, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * There's no assumptions of future coverage here and I'm not sure how you're reading that into my comments above, which make no such claims. Indeed, all of the links already discuss these matters, in some cases in quite a bit of detail, such as "Sony, Future U.S. Take Advertisers To The Qore" which discusses the advertising model, target demographics, initial sales, etc. Per WP:WEB, "web-specific content is deemed notable based on meeting any one of the following criteria ... the content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself." The links provided above all present analysis of the program far beyond that of simply announcing the program's launch and are more by themselves than many other similar articles have had, and survived, when discussed at AFD. Regardless, the links provided above are not the only ones available, they were simply a selection based on a cursory search. Debate   木  09:59, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Untraceable2U (talk) 21:21, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Let me suggest something.... Copy and paste the article in Playstation Store and put it here... :P BAM! PROBLEM SOLVED!
 * The solution has been suggested above (ie merge), but it's a content issue and therefore AFD is not the best place for that discussion. Merger issues are best resolved on the article's talk pages via the process described in WP:Merge. Debate   木  09:59, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


 * keep: there is enough bullshit in wikipedia anyway, one more or less is harmless. Cliché Online (talk) 15:20, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - has not received substantial, independent, reliable coverage. Those independent references provided are no more than press releases. Marasmusine (talk) 09:13, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * While assuming good faith, I wonder if you have checked the above references since they contain commentary, analysis and criticism without any suggestion of a press release that I can see... Debate   木  09:28, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep per Give an article a chance, Don't demolish the house while it's still being built, and User:Fresheneesz/Don't Destroy. Sincerely, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 16:54, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per Give an article a chance DoktorDec (talk) 22:12, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Should we call this? It looks like the majority of people want this article kept. Should the AfD notice be taken down now?  ChimpanzeeUK  - User | Talk | Contribs 11:54, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Not a vote. Randomran (talk) 15:15, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep: Non-notable. But article has only been around for 2 weeks and shows promise. I would support an AFD if people concluded after a reasonable amount of time that the article is simply unfixable, and will not comply with wikipedia guidelines. Randomran (talk) 15:15, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep** Why would this be integrated into the playstation store article when it is a separate entity from the playstation store? It seems to be a subscription based service, there is no particular reason why this shouldn't have its own page. If there is a probably with inaccuracies within the page, that is what the edit button is for and reference tags. XBOX Live Gold doesn't have its own page because it is an offset of the XBOX basic service, however, Qore is not an offset of the playstation store, rather a new 'interactive magazine' service. I have provided more reference links within the article. As the months pass, there will be more content and information to add to this article, however as of this point, you have to let the wiki users cultivate the page. The article makes no sense within the context of another article, because it is a standalone entity and product.I have referenced various url's that discuss the product in detail and referenced them. If you want to see the article stay, then expand on it. Make it as detailed as possible, cull information from as many sources as possible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Faviang (talk • contribs) 04:25, 20 June 2008 (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.