Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tribes (simulation game)


 * 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. W.marsh 14:21, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Tribes (simulation game)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This game supplement has no independent sources to demonstrate that it is notable, its plot/game summary does not provide context or sourced analysis of the book’s impact or historical significance, of which there is no evidence. Gavin Collins 15:45, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment Just as a point of information, this is not a gaming supplement, but a stand-alone role playing game. -Chunky Rice 16:38, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, fails WP:N; but IWBNI the nominator had taken time to get his facts straight. Percy Snoodle 17:48, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletions.   --Gavin Collins 18:38, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 17:03, 14 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep there is missing comprehensive list of games.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 17:08, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: What? - Rjd0060 17:28, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Like games, you know, board games. There is always lack of information.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 23:27, 14 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete: No legitimate assertion of notability and no reliable sources. - Rjd0060 17:28, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Nominator has his facts wrong again - this is a game, not a game suppliment. Lack of sources is grounds for improvement, not deletion. Edward321 23:12, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable game. Keb25 09:08, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment available at amazon.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 09:21, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Even if this was being sold by Amazon (it's not), I don't see how that's relevant to this discussion. -Chunky Rice 13:13, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Consider it part of Verifiability but not part of Notability. Amazon is not selling, but it has links to three vendors who are ... brokering vendor contacts is one of Amazon's attractions (though by no means unique to them). --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 21:37, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I think any published board game deserves some note here.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 21:42, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Fair enough - verifiability is a policy threshold for inclusion while notability is a guideline that is typically "enforced" as if it were policy. --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 23:48, 16 October 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.