Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/StarFighter: Quadrant Wars


 * 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. --Core desat 06:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

StarFighter: Quadrant Wars

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Wikipedia is not a game guide, cites no reliable sources which either support, or assert notability. Subject is a non-notable flash game. Contested prod. Haemo 02:49, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Keep: I think this should be kept. We can try to ship things up to make it not Game Facish.Pendo4 is here...Look around...hello???...I am here... 03:00, 4 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete because Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. None of the content in the article is sourced and most of it is not encyclopedic.  Leebo  T /C  03:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Oysterguitarst 03:13, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Keep because we can get it sourced. Specifically, we could ask Ben Olding to set up a webpage about it...would that be good enough? Is Ben Olding a good enough source? You know, the guy making the game? As for the popularity, the game has more than 100k views and earned Daily 5th Place on Newgrounds. I hold firmly by the belief that less popular games have had Wikipedia pages. No, I can't cite any, because I don't frequent Wiki'. And as for the topic of whether or not it's encyclopedic, it can be edited. DavidFrickinPiersol 07:12, 4 July 2007 (UTC) — DavidFrickinPiersol (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment - just a comment that notability is not the same as popularity, and other stuff existing is not an argument (if it does, which it may or may not). In addition, Ben Olding's personal website is not a reliable source that could help with your notability problem.  --Haemo 09:31, 4 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - no independent sources cited and none appearing via a Google search. Non-notable Flash game. To answer DavidFrickinPiersol, no Ben Olding's webpage would not be a good enough source. As the inventor of the game he is not independent and his endorsement does not make the game notable. Kim Dent-Brown   (Talk to me)  09:44, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Comment: Eventhought this game sounds like its not popular it should have Wikipedia page cause ppl do watch it and play it. Here link Here, Go search for it on Google. PLEASE KEEP THE ARTICLE. Its not fair.


 * Delete This flash game is certainly not notable. The fact that it exists (as noted by has nothing to do with this nomination.--Svetovid 20:25, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Strong Keep: I qant u guys to know there are games in wikipedia that are less popular than this! Also I have posted notes about this game. Can we atleast make a StarFighter Wiki? we can fix up the article any way u want!Pendo4 is here...Look around...hello???...I am here... 13:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * This user has already !voted above --Haemo 11:18, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep: Several members of the StarFighter Community contributed to this article trying to keep the article good... We can make it less like a game guide if that would be ok... Additionally the game has some notability, as Tom Fulp - Creator of Newgrounds ( has interviewed Ben Olding about the game's upcoming sequel... - Moo12321 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moo12321 (talk • contribs) — Moo12321 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Strong KeepMany members of the Starfighter commuinity have contributed to it,I myself being one have to.The page should be kept because it has a way of informing people,it is popular,and it is NOT written as a game guide...-Jawa2.0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jawa2.0 (talk • contribs) — Jawa2.0 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * CommentThe game is a notable flash game, if you do a Google search for Starfighter: Quadrant Wars it would show up on the list as the top one...
 * Comment The Wikipedia notability guidelines don't state "being at the top of a Google search" as a criterion for notability. If you search for Leebo86, I get the most hits for people who use that handle on the Internet, it seems. But that doesn't amount to anything at Wikipedia.  Leebo  T /C  18:02, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 07:35, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Comment This article shouldnt be deleted cause of these reasons. Evnthough waht u ppl are saying is corect its not right to dele it cause of that. We worked hard in making this article. And if ppl go and pass by this article they may want to join the games. Why dont u search up other flsh games u have on this website??/ THEY ARENT EVEN MENTIONED ANYWHERE AND YETU GET TO KEEP THEM!Pendo4 is here...Look around...hello???...I am here... 02:17, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete This is just another flash game.  There are no major mentions/reviews of this game at any major media site, failing WP:NOTE.   Everything in the article is from the creator or people invovled with the project.  Corpx 08:12, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
 * 20-Mule-Team Delete: I just went through each and every unique Google hit on this game (given that there are only 44, it didn't take that long). Not a single one of them is from a reliable source.  For all the SPA partisans claim that they can source this article to reliable sources -- and for the record, we're talking major gaming magazines, mass media, and the like -- they've yet to do so.  The game's website isn't even on the Alexa chart.  I'm quite willing to believe that there are a dozen fanatics who demonstrably really love this game, but I'm waiting for anyone to state the criteria at WP:V or WP:WEB this obscure game meets.    RGTraynor  15:26, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete and give RGTraynor's mules some carrots, as his comment looks to be bang on. Fails WP:WEB at present. Tony Fox (arf!) review? 20:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Very strong delete. No assertion of notability is presented, nor are there any independent sources provided to back them up. I know we aren't a bureaucracy, but even though I'm tempted to speedily delete it (NN web content), I'll let the AfD play out, so the community can clearly express where it stands—and possibly provide some borax, erm, salt for RGTraynor's mule team. —C.Fred (talk) 00:15, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment and Strong Delete It's easy to get a top result on Google if you type in the exact name of what you are looking for. Strong Delete because it fails WP:NOTE, there are no independent sources, and fails WP:WEB. Klytos 04:47, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * First of all, please calm down. There is no reason to SHOUT. Secondly, the other editors are citing Wikipedia policies and guidelines as their reasons to delete. As far as deletion discussions are concerned, these are the only types of arguments that matter -- ones that cite policies or guidelines. Other reasons, such as "we all worked really hard" and "we want to use Wikipedia to advertise our game" are not acceptable. Lastly, if you find articles about other non-notable flash games, nominate them for deletion.  Leebo   T /C  02:26, 8 July 2007 (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.