Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The 13th doll (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Existence is not notability.  DGG ( talk ) 05:09, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

The 13th doll
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

I believe this article to be of no notabilty TucsonDavid U . S . A . 03:38, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


 * This article relates to a real product and so is notable kutuup U . S . A . 03:42, 24 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.148.152.101 (talk)
 * Comment. Existing is not notability. Since the game hasn't even been released yet and has been "in production" for about 8 years, it's a bit early to say that a fan-made game has notability. I'll see what I can find, but most non-official games don't get enough attention from independent and reliable sources to qualify for a Wikipedia article.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 05:04, 24 February 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * comment Notability on Wikipedia means that the subject of the article has had multiple cases of non trivial coverage from reliable sources that are independent of the subject.--70.24.208.34 (talk) 00:44, 25 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. There's no reliable coverage in independent and reliable sources. I did see a handful of blogs, but none that would be considered to be reliable. The rest of the sources were either primary sources or "junk" sites that just mirror whatever you type in. If the game ever gets released and if it gets reliable coverage at that time, it can be re-added, but right now it's a pretty clear case of WP:TOOSOON and it doesn't pass any of the notability guidelines.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 05:12, 24 February 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Comment: This article has been deleted before. I'm not sure why it isn't coming up correctly in the box. Articles for deletion/The 13th Doll Tokyogirl79 (talk) 07:55, 24 February 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79

Comment I disagree, there are any number of such products listed on Wikipedia. The product has been referenced on a number of websites and is widely known. kutuup U . S . A . 03:38, 24 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.148.152.101 (talk)
 * Delete per Tokyogirl79. As an unreleased, fan-made game with minimal third party references, it presently lacks the notability required to keep.  Rorshacma (talk) 08:20, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:55, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:56, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete This article seems to make a better job of demonstrating the notability of its inspiration (and competitor?) rather than itself. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:23, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Also if the consensus is found to be to Delete. I also recommend that it be Salted see WP:SALT. Becuase it has been recreated before see comments by Tokyogirl179 TucsonDavid U . S . A . 04:52, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Comment Fine, do what you want. Salt it if that makes you happy, I'm done contributing to this site only to be incessantly shot down even when providing valid sources on articles. I won't be resubmitting it after release since I have no intention of wasting my time to contribute to this site any more. This is the fifth article I have written for this site on a range of topics and apparently every one has been "unnoteworthy". I'm past caring now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.242.168 (talk) 21:37, 25 February 2012 (UTC) Comment I already told you you can delete it if you want. I already withdrew my support for the article and my financial support for this site. Like I said, I have written a number of articles for this site on a range of subjects in an apparently futile attempt to contribute and been shot down on every occasion. If you're going to delete it just delete it already. I'm past caring what your reasons are and have already lost interest in your pseudo-academic reasoning. Your whole validity policy relies on "reliable" (ie. popular) 3rd party coverage anyway so the academic validity of this site is moot. Here's a hint on how to be a journalist: Not being reported in popular media does not render a topic non-existant. That should be lesson one. The level of amateurism on this site was enough to convince me to convince me that financial investment in it is a waste of time and money. Now please stop the emails asking me for money. They're just insulting. if you're going to E-beg, at least make sure you're sending the messages to people who might be stupid enough to actually send you some money. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.148.152.101 (talk) 04:00, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - Lack of coverage in third party, reliable sources. Does not meet the WP:GNG. Sergecross73   msg me   15:36, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Articles at AFD are typically open for 7 days, so that's why the discussion is still open. I skimmed the rest of what you said, and it looks like you're venting about your Wikipedia on a whole, which does not belong here at AFD, and as such, is being directed towards editors who don't know or don't care. Please stay on topic, and vent elsewhere. Sergecross73   msg me   16:47, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Comment I am keen to have it deleted to avoid damaging the reputation of the people who are working on the product. The makers of the game had no part in this article being written. I added the article as an impartial 3rd party after reading about the product on various websites and, seeing that it wasn't listed on here, I decided to add it. As far as "venting" goes, you can delete those comments if you want, you guys are good at that after all. I have already had the article published elsewhere and so it no longer needs to exist here. Since Wikipedia provides no forum for debate on essentially any matter, I was forced to voice my frustration here. At the risk of being told I've been naughty, what exactly is stopping me blanking the article? Will I receive a strongly worded email? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.148.152.101 (talk) 01:56, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Comment Furthermore, what do you mean by "your Wikipedia"? Since when was Wikipedia mine? Since you decided to only skim my last comment might I suggest that you at least pay some attention to what you are writing?
 * 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.