Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aliceffekt: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 23:19, 21 September 2014

Aliceffekt

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

Delete The article fails to establish the notability of the subject. Therefore it should be deleted.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Popnrock (talk • contribs)

Delete - Subject fails WP:GNG. 101.61.177.148 (talk) 16:45, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete : Unambiguous advertising or promotion. --Emilysantoss (talk) 08:57, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This AfD was never listed in the AfD log, so I will add it to today's log even though the discussion was created more than 10 days ago. --bonadea contributions talk 17:45, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep In addition to the fact that the article already includes a review in CNET and a fairly long interview in Indiegames.com (as well as some more trivial coverage), it is very easy to find more coverage - more reviews in CNET and Jayisgames, and other interviews, too. I suspect the nominator was not aware of WP:BEFORE. The article is not at all promotionally written, but it could do with some more sources. I'll try to add some as soon as possible. --bonadea contributions talk 17:54, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment : Being mentioned on CNET doesn't mean it should have automatically it's encyclopedic page. Author of this entry is obviously doing unambiguous advertising to an uncertain notability. Emilysantoss (talk) 23:19, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 17:57, 21 September 2014 edit Bonadea (talk \| contribs) Edit filter helpers, Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 151,321 edits m fix heading ← Previous edit		Revision as of 23:19, 21 September 2014 edit undo Emilysantoss (talk \| contribs) 96 edits No edit summary Next edit →
Line 14:		Line 14:

	*'''Keep''' In addition to the fact that the article already includes a review in [[CNET]] and a fairly long interview in [[Indiegames.com]] (as well as some more trivial coverage), it is very easy to find more coverage - more reviews in [[CNET]] and [[Jayisgames]], and other interviews, too. I suspect the nominator was not aware of [[WP:BEFORE]]. The article is not at all promotionally written, but it could do with some more sources. I'll try to add some as soon as possible. --''[[User:Bonadea\|bonadea]]'' <small>[[Special:Contributions/Bonadea\|contributions]] [[User talk:Bonadea\|talk]]</small> 17:54, 21 September 2014 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' In addition to the fact that the article already includes a review in [[CNET]] and a fairly long interview in [[Indiegames.com]] (as well as some more trivial coverage), it is very easy to find more coverage - more reviews in [[CNET]] and [[Jayisgames]], and other interviews, too. I suspect the nominator was not aware of [[WP:BEFORE]]. The article is not at all promotionally written, but it could do with some more sources. I'll try to add some as soon as possible. --''[[User:Bonadea\|bonadea]]'' <small>[[Special:Contributions/Bonadea\|contributions]] [[User talk:Bonadea\|talk]]</small> 17:54, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
			**'''Comment''' : Being mentioned on CNET doesn't mean it should have automatically it's encyclopedic page. Author of this entry is obviously doing unambiguous advertising to an uncertain notability. [[User:Emilysantoss\|Emilysantoss]] ([[User talk:Emilysantoss\|talk]]) 23:19, 21 September 2014 (UTC)