Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kineti-Go

Kineti-Go

Kineti-Go (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Non-notable, conflict of interest and barely-disguised promotion of something recently made up and productized. It maybe bordered on speedily deletable per G11 as promotional, but the author already deleted the {{proposed deletion}} tag I put on the article, indicating a belief that the product is notable, and has attempted to cite external sources to support this idea (some were bot-removed as invalid per external linking policy, e.g. links to known unreliable, user-edited sites like About.com). The article author, Mstromberg (talk · contribs), a single-purpose account who has made no edits other than to this article and to advertise in it in the see-also sections of mostly unrelated games, is the inventor and seller of the product and proprietor of the eponymous, one-product company Kineti-Go Games (he names himself in the article and is named in the one reliable but trivial source cited). This also touches on both WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY and WP:COMPANY issues, inasmuch as the article is a three-in-one promo piece. The author also attempted to use an interview with himself as if it were a reliable source. There's basically no showing of multiple instances of non-trivial coverage in editorially independent reliable sources. All we have is:

• A local-interest piece from a small community newspaper about how locals "Tom and Marlene England" carry the game in their store – it is not available from mainstream outlets (each game set appears to be hand-made from wood, so this is not surprising) – and interviewing the game-maker at a toy fair (another event interview and photos from same were the subject of the deleted About.com links).
• An entirely user-written review/webboard site that fails WP:RS again.

I'm sure it's a fun game if you like small-scale tabletop shuffleboard, of this which is just a magnetic variant, but this is nowhere near notable enough for an article here, and the promotional conflict of interest is a major non-neutral point of view problem, too. Kineti-Go is yet another "garage band" of the gaming world for now; it could become notable at some point the future, but isn't there yet. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 07:28, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 11:56, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

My experience with Kineti-go has been extremely positive. I live in a metropolitan area, visitors come frequently. There are two things that people love to do when visiting, see the city and play this game. Both are unique and both offer enjoyment to many. So it seems to be a relevant and notable article as people enjoy the game and it is becoming more popular. I believe if this page is removed people seeking information about it's history and related information would be harder to attain. I would, however, like to see some information about the physics involved added to the Wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.148.10.134 (talk) 16:15, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Kineti-Go was popular in my college town at several bars and game rooms. It offers a compact and fast-paced alternative to pool and darts and is easily accessible by virtually anyone. Some photos or diagrams of games and explanation of rules would help enhance this entry, but I don't believe it should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.90.213.130 (talk) 17:34, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

This article should not be erased and certainly does not warrant speedy deletion.

First, according to wikipedia policy, If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article or stand-alone list.

"Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail, so no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material.[1] This criteria is met in the Gazette article and on some of the reviews listed. More links will be coming too.

"Reliable" means sources need editorial integrity to allow verifiable evaluation of notability, per the reliable source guideline. Sources may encompass published works in all forms and media, and in any language. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability. The Gazette is a reliable source according to Wikipedia criteria "Sources",[2] for notability purposes, should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. The number and nature of reliable sources needed varies depending on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources. Multiple sources are generally expected.[3] Sources are not required to be available online, and they are not required to be in English. Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability.

The Gazette is a secondary source.

"Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by those affiliated with the subject or its creator. For example, self-publicity, advertising, self-published material by the subject, the subject's website, autobiographies, and press releases are not considered independent.[4]

The Gazette is independent of the subject

Wikipedia definition of Self-promotion

WP:SELFPROMOTE does not apply here

Conflict of interest often presents itself in the form of self-promotion, including advertising links, personal website links, personal or semi-personal photos, or other material that appears to promote the private or commercial interests of the editor, or their associates.

Examples of these types of material include:

Links that appear to promote products by pointing to obscure or not particularly relevant commercial sites (commercial links).

Links that appear to promote otherwise obscure individuals by pointing to their personal pages.

Biographical material that does not significantly add to the clarity or quality of the article.

There is nothing in this article that can be construed as promotional. It is strictly factual. It includes a basic summary, equipment, gameplay, and origins. Nothing more, nothing less. The article points to a relevant website- www.kinetigo.com,which explains the rules of the game and the origins. Iphone points to apple.com. Ford f150 points to Ford- That is just how it is. No individuals are pointed to here. The "About" link I added was to convince you of Kineti-Go's notibility. A well know website seeking out the owner of the company to interview him about the company's games. That is notable by most people's definition.

As for me not editing other articles...I am not sure what that has to do with this. I stick with what I know. If more people stick to what they knew on Wikipedia it would be a much more reliable source. I am en expert on Kineti-Go and other parlor/table games. That is what I know. Would you like me to edit Busan, Korea to get more credibility with you?

You statement "promotional conflict of interest is a major problem" has no merit. As stated earlier,there is nothing promotional in this article and Wikipedia does not have an explicit policy against conflicts of interest.I did follow the suggested guidelines.

Your claims of a one product company and entirely handmade products are also inaccurate. Check your sources for that. As for linking to and advertising in unrelated games, Those are very much related games. You may want to look at the links again.

In summary, I believe that you have failed to make your case for non-notable, self promotion, and something recently made up( The game is 8 years old).

This page should remain up! Mstromberg (talk) 19:38, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

• Delete—I think that the nom-statement is a little harsh, but the over-the-top protests of the clearly COI-infected article creator don't help matters. I did find one additional source, but only the abstract is available on-line... [1] What I will say is that I would expect a notable product developed in 2005 to have enduring coverage, not two mentions in regional papers in the same year the product launched. Since the coverage seems to be one-shot coverage and there hasn't been any mention of the product since then, I have to agree that the product seems non-notable. WP:PRODUCT seems to set a pretty high bar for product articles; I sincerely hope that nobody here thinks this is equally notable as the iPhone. Livit⇑^Eh?/_What? 23:57, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

• "Don't delete" there is a New Have Register article I will be posting a link to later today. If the two previous articles don't establish Notability (though it hey do per Wikipedia policy), the addition of this thrid paper will certainly do . MStromberg71.234.49.115 (talk) 13:22, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

• "Don't delete"

While the inventor of the game may be the primary author of the article, I find the article to be fact based and not promotional. Wikipedia is a great resource for objective and factual information to be collected, as well as a reference to other sources of primary information. The links to BoardGameGeek for third party reviews and newspaper features are a start. There is a "chicken and the egg" is with the notion of "notable" articles. This is especially difficult for inventions/products that are not mass produced (and heavily marketed/seeded by large corporations) or technology oriented (where products are readily internet-accessible and targeted at internet users). I'm pleased that this article exists, I would like it to remain as a reference article for others curious about this game and its origins. I'm not in anyway associated with M Stromberg, nor do I even own a Kinetigo game. I'm a curious potential customer that spent quite some time trying to find out more about this game when I first learned about it. Without the wikipedia article, I would have been lost in search engine land. (Sorry I think I put this comment in the Talk section) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.105.141.161 (talk) 15:54, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

• Don't Delete I have just added a reference to a New Haven Register article about Kineti-Go to the references section of the article in discussion. We now have two newspaper articles in Maryland covering the game as the primary topic of the article, one newspaper article from South Carolina,and one From New Haven, Connecticut. In addition, there are links to online reviews of Kineti-Go at a well known game forum, the Kineti-Go website, two links to bloggers reviews, and two links addressing Kineti-Go that were deleted by the bot.

All of the points in the motion to delete this article have been thoroughly addressed and there are no grounds to delete this article. The suggestion to delete this article should be dismissed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mstromberg (talk • contribs) 20:56, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

'SmMcCandlish why are you just proposing deletion for this article now? The history shows it has been on Wikipedia for over six years. I checked some of the links that this article points to. Pitchnut is a much stronger candidate for deletion than this article. So is Pinchonette. Neither cite references or sources and both are non-notable by Wikipedia standards. One has never been produced ,is only hand made, and is popular " in 2 farming villages in Ontario". Kineti-go has had four primary articles written about it in three papers in three states. There is also a reference to Montana in the article. That spans most of the USA. I guess I am confused as to why you would suggest deleting this article now and not suggesting it for the other game articles you have a history of editing? What connection am I missing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.234.49.115 (talk) 02:38, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

'DON'T DELETE Although Kinetigo is a product, it's value as an accessible and tangible educational tool for the physics of polarity and the the nature of magnetic forces should merit it's availability on Wikipedia as a resource. It has successfully been used in math and science classrooms as a teaching tool. Additionally, the company has a history of donating games to schools. Kinetigo is as much a "product" as it is an exercise in demonstrating some otherwise abstract laws of physics. This page should remain as a resource for anyone researching magnetic forces and their application. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Derekbyron (talk • contribs) 13:53, 8 March 2012 (UTC) Delete per nom. I'm finding no sources, valid or otherwise, that establish notability. - Jelly Soup (talk) 08:04, 12 March 2012 (UTC)