Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Lost City of Malathedra


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 04:39, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

The Lost City of Malathedra

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

No claim of notability. Lacks coverage in multiple independant reliable sources. Duffbeerforme (talk) 04:41, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete- no notability established. There's also clear conflict of interest issues. Reyk  YO!  05:03, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete due to lack of independent sources. It Is Me Here  t / c 10:58, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. Due to lack of substantive content, context and suspected promotion. - Mgm|(talk) 11:07, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete It is so lost that we can't find any independent sources! Ecoleetage (talk) 13:52, 22 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletions. MrKIA11 (talk) 15:20, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. See here for coverage for what may be reliable sources. --Eastmain (talk) 15:50, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. 56,000 ghits is a lot. Tris2000 (talk) 11:42, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - I make it 21,000 ghits, which plunges down to 889 if you filter out blogs and forums. The 5 Google News hits mentioned by Eastmain are all press releases or publisher's descriptions, which are not suitable for establishing WP:Notability. I can't accept the provided Helium source as a professional review; by his own admission, that contributor only played the game for 20 minutes. Marasmusine (talk) 16:54, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as per Maramusine. Google hits are not enough to measure notability, and a closer inspection of the search results reveals no reliable third-party sources that would help this meet the WP:N guideline. No one has been able to WP:PROVEIT with reliable third-party sources. Randomran (talk) 06:43, 26 November 2008 (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.