Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Twin Saga

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.
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. Without prejudice to recreation when/if additional sources become available. Euryalus (talk) 22:19, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Twin Saga (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)

Fails WP:GNG. No significant results in the WP:VG/RS custom Google search engine. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 00:40, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:06, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Taiwan-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:06, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this title, besides three sources from Siliconera. Unfortunately, they are not discussing the game's significantly, and will definitely be insufficient when it comes to writing an article. AdrianGamer (talk) 12:46, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Sam Sailor Talk! 23:07, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 06:24, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 01:00, 22 August 2016 (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.