Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Video Games Europe


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. ✗ plicit  00:40, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Video Games Europe

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails the general and organization-specific notability policies. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:20, 18 November 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:47, 25 November 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:06, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Europe,  and Belgium. UtherSRG (talk) 12:20, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:46, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment - The nomination certainly seems accurate to the article's current state - it appears to be entirely sourced to their own (1st party) website. It was a bit difficult to do source hunting though, as there are so many false positives with a generic name such as this. I did find this GamesIndustry.biz article that did a story on the subjects statistics. While not enough to keep the article, it's the only thing keeping me searching. If nothing else is found, I'm leaning delete. Sergecross73   msg me  16:00, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - I made some searches using the WikiProject Video games reliable sources search engine, the Wikipedia reference search engine, and even the WikiProject Video games situational sources search engine, and it gives me nothing on the subject that could be used to make a significant article. Davest3r08 > : )  (talk)  14:17, 2 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete - I haven't been able to find any additional sourcing. No prejudice towards recreation of someone can prove it meets the GNG, but conversely, there's very little to be lost from the current article either, which has little content in it, and even less encyclopedic content. Sergecross73   msg me  15:07, 2 December 2023 (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.