Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ravensword 2: Shadowlands


 * 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. ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  17:11, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Ravensword 2: Shadowlands

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete, non notable software. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 14:50, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

It is very notable. It was once top 10 paid games on the App Store, and it got greenlit to go to steam. I don't know how a non-notable piece of software could do that.--Adam9812 (talk) 15:24, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * There should be no shortage of third party sources then? Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:57, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

The agree light on steam already has a source, but it wouldn't fit Wikipedia's style to say "The game even was top 10 in the App Store.". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam9812 (talk • contribs) 16:17, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:50, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:51, 12 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment - Upon my searching, it looks like, while the original Ravensword would easily pass the WP:GNG requirements. (There's enough sources at it's Metacritic entry alone, see here.) However, that game doesn't appear to have any article. If it did, I'd recommend a redirect to it. As it is, I think this article will be (Wikipedia's definition) of notable someday, but it doesn't appear to be now. The only reliable source I can find on it is a Slide to Play preview. Sergecross73   msg me   18:33, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Wait, the article seems to suggest that "Ravensword 2: Shadowlands", is often shortened to Ravensword: Shadowlands. If they're the same game, then its an easy "keep" due to plenty of sources being out there. Can someone confirm/deny this for me? Sergecross73   msg me   18:37, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Ravensword Shadowlands And the original are indeed different games. I have played both. --Adam9812 (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Also the second is arguably more notable than the first. --Adam9812 (talk) 20:34, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

That would indeed make a difference and it appears you are correct "From the award winning studio that brought you Ravensword: The Fallen King and Aralon: Sword and Shadow, comes RAVENSWORD: SHADOWLANDS. " from [] Hell In A Bucket (talk) 19:40, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

So far, the evidence seems to be in favor of keep. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam9812 (talk • contribs) 03:41, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - There is easily enough coverage to satisfy the WP:GNG. I've gone and bulked up the reception section with 5 or so reviews, but there's plenty out there.
 * http://www.slidetoplay.com/previews/ravensword-2-hands-on-preview/
 * http://www.toucharcade.com/2012/12/19/ravensword-shadowlands-review/
 * http://www.slidetoplay.com/review/ravensword-shadowlands-review/
 * http://www.gamezebo.com/games/ravensword-shadowlands/review
 * http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2012/12/20/gorgeous-ravensword-shadowlands-trailer-immerses-you.aspx
 * http://www.digitallydownloaded.net/2013/01/review-ravensword-shadowlands-ipad.html
 * http://toucharcade.com/2012/11/30/ravensword-shadowlands-hands-on-preview-and-video-the-next-big-ios-rpg-is-almost-here/
 * There's many more out there too. Many of these have consensus on being reliable per discussions at WP:VG/S. The rest look reliable as far as I can tell. Sergecross73   msg me   19:44, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * These things usually run the course of 7 days unless the nominator withdraws the nomination, but I agree, it looks like a likely keep. It'd help if you gave a formal "Keep" !vote that relates more to Wikipedia policy, like the WP:GNG, though. Arguments relating to its status on the App Store or Steam are likely to be ignored by the closing Admin, since they don't relate to Wikipedia policy... Sergecross73   msg me   16:09, 13 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep as passing WP:GNG with in-depth (reviews) coverage by multiple independent reliable (WP:VG/RS sources. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 18:56, 17 November 2013 (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.