Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Super Mario War


 * 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. Luna Santin 08:39, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Super Mario War
Non-notable fanmade game, fails WP:SOFTWARE. Andre (talk) 00:26, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete the usual: no reliable sources. Also, most of the article is basically a game guide. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  01:13, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletions.   -- Ig yqzs 01:55, 27 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. -- moe.   RON   Let's talk  01:56, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Itsame Delete Danny Lilithborne 01:57, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Listing on SMW will need to be removed upon deletion. EVula 05:03, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete w/banananana. Daveydw ee b ( chat/patch ) 05:29, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --Masamage 08:07, 27 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete - A promotional page for another non-notable unverifiable fan game. Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day. The Kinslayer 10:14, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, not that anyone cares. Rōnin 22:33, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment As I've said to you on another AfD, I'd be happy to change my vote if presented with evidence of notability. EVula 05:00, 28 October 2006 (UTC)


 * KEEP Plenty of evidence of notability. Let's not be so quick to delete based on arbitrary labels of "fanware". Justinpwilsonadvocate 16:07, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Where is the plentiful evidence? EVula 16:16, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Please stop stalking me, User:EVula. And the evidence is in the references. Thanks. Justinpwilsonadvocate 18:15, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * No one here has the time, energy, or desire to stalk you. Please assume good faith and realize that EVula is one of the many people who keeps an eye on the Articles For Deletion page itself. --Masamage 18:18, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I am referrin to a pattern of behavior re: me that goes far, far beyond this discussion. Justinpwilsonadvocate 19:16, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Ignoring the stalking bit, I have to point out that there aren't any references in the article. There are four external links, which all point back to (ultimately) the same website. Again, where is the evidence of notability? EVula 19:39, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - Per Starblind. Wickethewok 19:34, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete No independant sources that misses our inclusion guidelines for software and our inclusion guidelines for web content. To top that off, most of the article is a game guide and Wikipedia is not a game guide. --Kunzite
 * KEEP This game is in fact notable - it's been updated many times and collaborated upon, has been featured on Digg, and is linked to on thousands of websites. Google it! eyesnapped
 * Comment The fact that something is updated or is part of a collaborative project is not a valid reason to keep. Being featured or having links on a "social bookmarking" site or a search engine also do not indicate notability.  Do you have any references?  Can you show us multiple, non-trivial mentions in media or scholarly articles?  Has the site won a major award? --Kunzite 03:58, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Just to note (and I'm not saying this to imply any sort of inferiority), user has less than 20 edits. Andre (talk) 04:37, 2 November 2006 (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.