Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gore: Ultimate Soldier: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 23:48, 27 March 2022

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 keep. PeterSymonds (talk) 10:29, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gore: Ultimate Soldier

An extensive article with not one relliable independent source cited, the publisher is redlinked, most of it is a game guide (WP:NOT). Guy (Help!) 20:53, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 23:49, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – 36 reviews on Game Rankings, 22 reviews on Metacritic. Even accounting for overlap, that's more than enough to create a solid reception section. Articles provided by GameSpot and IGN show enough evidence to create a development section. The subject easily meets notability requirements. Just because the article is currently underdeveloped is not a reason to bring it to AfD, consider its potential, not its current state. I'd hardly consider the article "extensive", its barely off stub levels, and the one reference it does have in the article is a reliable source. -- Sabre (talk) 00:44, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Sabre. SharkD (talk) 04:56, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep & tag for wikification. Per above. WP:V and WP:RS are sufficiently verified.MLauba (talk) 14:09, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and cleanup — notability easily established. However, cleanup is definitely needed to improve the tone and remove the cruft/gameguide material. Deletion not necessary here. MuZemike 21:13, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete — questionable WP:RS indeed, but there's a possibility it could be improved Aurush kazemini^talk 06:47, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+<div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
+:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]).  No further edits should be made to this page.''
+<!--Template:Afd top
+Note:  If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]].  When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
+The result was    '''keep'''. <span style="font-family:Arial;"> [[User:PeterSymonds|<span style="color:#02e;">Peter</span><b style="color:#02b;">Symonds</b>]]&nbsp;([[User talk:PeterSymonds|<span style="color:#02e;">talk</span>]])</span> 10:29, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 ===[[Gore: Ultimate Soldier]]===
-{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|G}}
 :{{la|Gore: Ultimate Soldier}} (<span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:Gore: Ultimate Soldier|wpReason={{urlencode: [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gore: Ultimate Soldier]]}}&action=delete}} delete]</span>) – <includeonly>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gore: Ultimate Soldier|View AfD]])</includeonly><noinclude>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2009 February 6#{{anchorencode:Gore: Ultimate Soldier}}|View log]])</noinclude>
@@ Line 6: / Line 12: @@
 *<small>'''Note''':  This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Deletion|list of video game related deletion discussions]]. [[User:MrKIA11|MrKIA11]] ([[User talk:MrKIA11|talk]]) 23:49, 6 February 2009 (UTC)</small>
-*'''Keep''' – [http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/448613.asp 36 reviews on Game Rankings], [http://uk.gamespot.com/pc/action/goreultimatesoldier/news.html?mode=all&om_act=convert&om_clk=newsfeatures&tag=newsfeatures;header;more 22 reviews on Metacritic]. Even accounting for overlap, that's more than enough to create a solid reception section. Articles provided by [http://uk.gamespot.com/pc/action/goreultimatesoldier/news.html?mode=all&om_act=convert&om_clk=newsfeatures&tag=newsfeatures;header;more GameSpot] and [http://uk.pc.ign.com/objects/017/017216_articles.html IGN] show enough evidence to create a development section. The subject easily meets notability requirements. Just because the article is currently underdeveloped is not a reason to bring it to AfD, [[WP:POTENTIAL|consider its potential, not its current state]]. -- [[User:S@bre|Sabre]] ([[User talk:S@bre|talk]]) 00:44, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
+*'''Keep''' – [http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/448613.asp 36 reviews on Game Rankings], [http://uk.gamespot.com/pc/action/goreultimatesoldier/news.html?mode=all&om_act=convert&om_clk=newsfeatures&tag=newsfeatures;header;more 22 reviews on Metacritic]. Even accounting for overlap, that's more than enough to create a solid reception section. Articles provided by [http://uk.gamespot.com/pc/action/goreultimatesoldier/news.html?mode=all&om_act=convert&om_clk=newsfeatures&tag=newsfeatures;header;more GameSpot] and [http://uk.pc.ign.com/objects/017/017216_articles.html IGN] show enough evidence to create a development section. The subject easily meets notability requirements. Just because the article is currently underdeveloped is not a reason to bring it to AfD, [[WP:POTENTIAL|consider its potential, not its current state]]. I'd hardly consider the article "extensive", its barely off stub levels, and the one reference it does have in the article is a reliable source. -- [[User:S@bre|Sabre]] ([[User talk:S@bre|talk]]) 00:44, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
+*'''Keep''' per [[User:S@bre|Sabre]]. [[User:SharkD|SharkD]] ([[User talk:SharkD|talk]]) 04:56, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
+*'''Keep''' & tag for wikification. Per above. [[WP:V]] and [[WP:RS]] are sufficiently verified.[[User:MLauba|MLauba]] ([[User talk:MLauba|talk]]) 14:09, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
+*'''Keep''' and '''cleanup''' — notability easily established. However, cleanup is definitely needed to improve the tone and remove the cruft/gameguide material. Deletion not necessary here. [[User talk:MuZemike|MuZemike]] 21:13, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
+*'''Weak delete''' &mdash; questionable [[WP:RS]] indeed, but there's a possibility it could be improved <tt style="font-family: fixedsys; color: white; background-color: black;border: 2px solid yellow;">[[User:Aurush kazemini|Aurush kazemini]]</tt><sup>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Aurush_kazemini talk]</sup> 06:47, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
+:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>