Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syobon action


 * 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. (non-admin closure)  TheSpecialUser TSU 01:44, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Syobon action

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Freeware game article sourced only by blogs and Youtube videos. Does not meet WikiProject Video games guidelines nor WP:GNG. Tgeairn (talk) 23:02, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Not yet done looking for sources, but this at least seems to constitute a reliable source that discusses the game in-depth.  I, Jethrobot  drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 23:08, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 02:55, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. 02:55, 17 August 2012 (UTC)  • Gene93k (talk) 02:55, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. 02:55, 17 August 2012 (UTC)  • Gene93k (talk) 02:55, 17 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep The above article. this French article and this Danish article about the game and its difficulty I think tips the scale in favor of keeping the article. This scholarly article also describes the notoriety of the game in the context of game design.  I will add these to the article momentarily.  I, Jethrobot  drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 05:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per sources found by I Jethrobot. The PCWorld page looks quite promising actually. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:52, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - Changing my !vote as nom to Neutral, given the great work I Jethrobot has done so far with the article. I'll leave it to others' discretion whether to close this early, but leaving it open for the duration may get a couple more eyes on continuing to improve an article that has been languishing for years. --Tgeairn (talk) 19:40, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. - Another n00b (talk) 21:50, 19 August 2012 (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.