Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Utopia (online 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. Shimeru (talk) 19:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Utopia (online game)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Fails WP:N and WP:V: non-notable game with no references from reliable, third-party, published sources. Nothing I can find meets the WikiProject Video games list of recommended sources. Wyatt Riot (talk) 21:46, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 23:43, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. I edited the article and removed all trivia information. I added one half-notable reviewer score and another half-notable game's description ref. I suppose without all the junk it had, the article may warrant its existence. — H3llkn0wz ▎talk 13:53, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The problem is, the only references are by:
 * a non-notable reviewer on a non-notable site that allows anybody to write reviews, and the article is especially bad in this case, with quite a few spelling/grammatical/punctuation errors (Shvoong)
 * a non-notable reviewer on a case-by-case site (see here), the review is okay but certainly not game journalism as demonstrated by a few spelling/grammatical mistakes (OMGN)
 * I don't see how that meets WP:N or WP:V at all. What we need are quality sources like those suggested at WikiProject Video games/Sources.  Wyatt Riot (talk) 15:19, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. Well&mdash;to be honest&mdash;I couldn't care less about this browser game. Just seemed appropriate to give it a chance. — H3llkn0wz ▎talk 16:00, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I honestly wasn't trying to sound like a dick there but I think it came across that way. Wyatt Riot (talk) 16:45, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Nah, you did not. Both those are wank sources and I know it. I was just trying to act as an attorney for an article that&mdash;once deleted&mdash;will never be seen again. — H3llkn0wz ▎talk 18:13, 4 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - I agree that this game has had insufficient coverage in reliable publications. Marasmusine (talk) 11:36, 5 April 2010 (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.