Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stack the States


 * 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 delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 09:55, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Stack the States

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Lack of WP:GNG. Using the WP:VG/RS custom Google search engine, it shows up in the list "Mobile Apps to Keep Kids Occupied and Happy" on PC Mag and specifically on Engadget. Even if it is in fact the most popular app, that's not a reason to have an article on the subject. Soetermans. T / C 12:38, 16 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Is not by Engadget staff? There's also under-review shortish 148apps. —  HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 13:23, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * When I click on her name, it shows up empty. She's not on the staff page, maybe she doesn't work there any more? Her Twitter description doesn't help, while her personal website has expired. But when I google her name, it does bring up more Engadget articles... --Soetermans. T / C 16:34, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I think I would call them reliable, in this instance, even if they are/were not part of regular staff. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 16:47, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, considering her work, I'd say the Engadget source would be okay and I've reworded my original rationale. Do you think two sources are enough to merit its own article? --Soetermans. T / C 17:02, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hodgkins worked for Joystiq and that whole site was subsumed into Engadget czar  20:26, 19 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Weak delete as a non-notable video game failing WP:GNG with no multiple reliable independent in-depth sources, such as WP:VG/RS. Engadget review looks good and 148apps might be good, but otherwise I cannot locate any in-depth material. Does not appear to be enough content to write an article. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 15:54, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Likewise. I was going to nominate this myself but wasn't interested in dealing with the edge cases: there are a few hits in a video game reliable sources custom (and normal) Google search that recommend the game for kids, but they don't say enough about the game or its importance to warrant an article about the topic. If there were multiple reviews from reliable sources, I could change my mind, but I don't see it. Article topic lacks significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources. (?) No worthwhile redirect targets. czar  20:00, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions.  czar  20:00, 20 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per the reasons I left in my PROD nomination.  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   10:17, 23 February 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.