Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Twisted Kicks


 * 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. Consensus is to delete. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 18:36, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Twisted Kicks

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I came across this as a speedy candidate, where it was tagged as being overly promotional. The page isn't over the top promotional enough to be a comfortable speedy, however at the same time there really isn't anything out there to show how this game is ultimately notable enough for an article. It exists and can be played, but there's just no coverage outside of an article written by the student newspaper of the college the game's creators attended. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  04:13, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - For what it's worth, I agree that this probably shouldn't be speedy deleted, because there is content and there is referencing and theoretically possible notability. That said, I agree that this page does not quite pass the threshold for notability.  It's just too small and local. Fieari (talk) 04:58, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep- I'm still working on the Twisted Kicks page, adding more links and reviews. I just added a 'Reception' sub-topic to the page. The page is a work-in-progress, but I have been slowly updating it. Kbar100 (talk) 18:38, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * You cannot and should not link to Amazon reviews on Wikipedia or really to Amazon at all. (This wasn't meant to be harsh, just to emphasize that it isn't seen as appropriate to add to Wikipedia. In general you should not be linking to any e-commerce site like Amazon, Barnes & Nobles, Wal-Mart, etc on Wikipedia.) The reason for this is that anyone can write a review on Amazon, so the site isn't discerning at all. There have actually been articles about people swaying the ratings in one direction or another to either promote something or troll someone, something that's actually pretty common on most sites that allow for user submitted reviews. The Board Game Geeks site looks to be the same, although it isn't an e-commerce site. The basic rule of thumb is that if the site allows users to post reviews, it cannot be used to establish notability and should not be mentioned on a Wikipedia article. While I don't think that the game creators are going around asking people to bolster their ratings on various sites, people can and have done this in the past, to the point where this sort of information shouldn't be used in the article at all. The only exception to this would be if the user ratings gained widespread media attention, as was the case with IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes user ratings for Saving Christmas or Amazon reviews for Bend, Not Break. In either case the user ratings got fairly widespread media attention, allowing us to include mention of the user ratings in the article. It's also something that can be seen as fairly promotional in tone, even if the intention wasn't to promote. Now I've also removed the link to the Apple store download. Links like that are considered to be inappropriate on Wikipedia because they can also be seen as inherently promotional. The official website can remain and ideally the link to the various download sites should already be in the official website. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  03:38, 24 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete The only possible source I could find came from the Daily Bruin which is the student newspaper for the university the two creators were attending when they developed the game. There aren't enough sources covering the game to meet notability requirements, and the one possible source that does exist is not independent of the subject. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:04, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as all of this simply suggests it's too soon for a solidly notable article and searches found nothing better. SwisterTwister   talk  06:15, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  06:15, 27 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete promotional article with no suitable sources to prove notability. ZettaComposer (talk) 11:45, 27 May 2016 (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.