Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ZOMG!


 * 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   no consensus. Lankiveil (speak to me) 05:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

ZOMG!

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

Browserbased game with no assertion of notability. Relies entirely on selfpublished sources. The article lacks coverage by multiple reliable sources independent of the game or its creator, Gaia Online. So, delete per WP:WEB. Keep in mind before commenting that I'm talking about a browserbased game here, not the term ZOMG. Google is way off here if you just search for that term before commenting. EconomicsGuy (talk) 16:27, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * That's all right. Some of us know how to drive Google:
 * Uncle G (talk) 16:58, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect with Gaia Online which pretty much already covers this subject. Doesnt appear to be notable in it's own right and all info appears to be self-sourced. --neon white talk 17:12, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Uncle G (talk) 16:58, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect with Gaia Online which pretty much already covers this subject. Doesnt appear to be notable in it's own right and all info appears to be self-sourced. --neon white talk 17:12, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect with Gaia Online which pretty much already covers this subject. Doesnt appear to be notable in it's own right and all info appears to be self-sourced. --neon white talk 17:12, 15 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletions.  MuZemike  ( talk ) 19:30, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep and cleanup, preferably with a chainsaw. Verifiable MMO game, but is also borderline speedy for G11 (very spammish). If it can be cleaned up veraciously, it would certainly earn a boldface keep from me. MuZemike  ( talk ) 19:33, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * but how does it establish notability? --neon white talk 00:34, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - three press releases are not enough to satisfy the general notability guideline. Marasmusine (talk) 21:21, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to Gaia Online. The press released found are only indications of temporary news coverage but not long term notability. --M ASEM  05:37, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to OMG if deleted or merged, the game is not primary meaning, ZOMG is. 76.66.198.46 (talk) 05:57, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm fine with a merge/redirect so if the closer chooses that then I'm okay with that. I know how to "drive Google" but I also know the difference between a reprint of a press release and independent coverage. EconomicsGuy (talk) 17:23, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep for now. It's notable as the planned expansion of Gaia Online, yet not suitable for merging into it, as gameplay so different, it would make the combined article as mess.  Yes, multiple sources are skimpy for this, but that is to be expected for a game in beta; this should improve very soon.  If not, it can be deleted in a few weeks; no need to be hasty about something that's breaking news.  --A D Monroe III (talk) 20:50, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It is currently in the gaia article that is why merging makes sense. We do not base notability on what may or may not become available in the future. see WP:CBALL. Wikipedia is'nt a news source. --neon white talk 21:11, 17 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - self sourced and spammy. Requires major cleanup. Facts are unreferenced. Non notable beta release game, as per WP:N this should be deleted and recreated when the game achieves such. - DustyRain (talk) 17:31, 18 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.