Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/3059 (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. But can be restored for reuse of the content in a broader article.  Sandstein  09:41, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

3059 (game)

3059 (game) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'm not sure if this meets WP:GNG. Cited sources do not provide significant coverage and are mostly self-published (or considered unreliable by WP:VG/RS: Home of the Underdogs). GameBanshee has nothing better (another copy of the game's blurb) and I'm unable to find better sources, which may have to do with the game's title. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 16:36, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 16:37, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:45, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

• Comment I have to see if there are more sources, but this might be a potential redirect to an article on phr00t, the developer that wrote this and 4 other games (3069, 3079, 3089, and 4089) , with the latter gaining some attention as it is a VR title. I don't think any of the individual games have specific notability but as a whole there may be notability for the developer and as such this can be a redirect to that. --MASEM (t) 17:56, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
• Move to Phr00t and expand. I don't see enough on 3059 in specific, but there's plenty of coverage for the sequels, though I'd say that the best common topic for the sequels is not any single release but its developer (per a video game reliable sources custom Google search) czar 15:03, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
• Delete for now or redirect once the Phroot article is started if notable and conceivable as there's simply not much here to suggest convincingly better. SwisterTwister talk 07:25, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
• expand and moveto an article about phroot or about the series in general. We should find sources for the series and other articles. The games are very historic and it would be a shame to remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.186.152 (talk) 15:56, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:18, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:34, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

• Basically per Czar. The 3059 (game) topic is non-notable but its content may be reused in a new article. sst✈^(discuss) 16:15, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
• Delete this article. There should be another article created per Czar's point above, but this article isn't what should be placed there-- instead a new article needs to be freshly created. Nomader (talk) 07:44, 22 December 2015 (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.