Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shingen the Ruler


 * 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.  Sandstein  17:32, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Shingen the Ruler

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Dearth of significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. (?) It had no meaningful hits in a video game reliable sources custom Google search. No reviews listed in our database of historical sources, MobyGames. There are no worthwhile redirect targets. czar 03:31, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions.  czar  03:31, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment - elementary coverage does exist on Google Books. This includes page 121 of the Video Game Bible, 1985-2002 by Andy Slaven, in which he writes "this strategy game takes place in feudal Japan and offers a good story line and complex options." It also achieved a listing in Classic Home Video Games, 1985-1988: A Complete Reference Guide by Brett Weiss but nothing of substance. Twin Galaxies' Official Video Game & Pinball Book of World Records seems to talk about the game, but it's not publicly accessible unfortunately. Satellizer   (´ ･ ω ･ `)  10:18, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as searches also found nothing noticeably better. SwisterTwister   talk  06:06, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:02, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - A brief review of this game is present in Nintendo Power volume 16], although it appears to be the only appearance in Nintendo's famous publication. A book "VideoGames and Computer Entertainment: Complete Guide to Nintendo Video Games" by Andy Eddy appears to give it a full page review, although I don't know the contents and thus I don't know whether it would be considered notable or non-notable for purposes of this discussion. One consideration that would need to be taken into this discussion due to its era, most of the primary sources for it would be print publications only, and thus might require more effort to uncover than a simple Google search. I hope that this meets criteria for a Keep vote, and apologize if it does not. -Cookie3 (talk) 10:40, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * We usually use three significant reviews as the lowest of low bars. Two doesn't quite give us enough to write a full article, though perhaps it can be merged and expanded somewhere. czar  14:04, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Would similar sources in other languages (e.g., Japanese) suffice for notability purposes with regards to the English page? (I don't have any handy; I'm just questioning whether it'd be considered acceptable).. I also just noticed that the Hot B page was deleted -- I wish I'd noticed so I could've participated. Too late now, I suppose. -Cookie3 (talk) 19:49, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Yep, any language as long as it's an established/reliable outlet. (See WP:VG/RS for some vetted sources.) Never too late—do you have sources for Hot B? You could start a draft at Draft:Hot B czar  20:16, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Nope, don't have any great sources for Hot B (all the print sources I have are about their published games, and while one could build a silhouette of a page based on that, I think the page would still be a candidate for deletion). Regarding Shingen the Ruler, I'm certain I read one other print review, but I dug through my magazine archive and couldn't find it, so maybe I'm delusional.. and even if I wasn't, that as-of-yet-undiscovered print review plus Nintendo Power #16 only equal 2 print reviews, and would still fall short of the 3 you recommended. The local library doesn't have the Twin Galaxies book or Eddy's VGCE:Complete Guide so I can't evaluate them for possible citation. I'd still favor "keep" since the page already exists and I am certain that the sources are out there.. but without a greater effort at research it would be tough to justify. So... ultimately, whatever happens with the page is fine. I would have suggested maybe making a small blurb and putting it on the Hot B page, and then redirecting, but... well... -Cookie3 (talk) 12:32, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:10, 19 April 2016 (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.