Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armorica (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 merge to Eric B. Vogel. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:25, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Armorica (game)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Non-notable game with only three refs, the first one is potentially reliable, but the editor is also a prominent contributor to BGG (https://boardgamegeek.com/blog/1/boardgamegeek-news), which according to the Wikiproject Board Games is an unreliable blog. The second ref is not independent, and the third one is too unreliable. Upon a search, I could not find any awards or reliable refs covering this, hence listing this at AfD as there are not multiple reliable independent sources. Thanks! VickKiang (talk) 23:10, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are certainly more references out there: https://www.dicetower.com/game/67285/armorica

Is there clear criteria for which board games should get articles and which should not?

I feel like having Amorica relevant to understanding Vogel's progress as a game designer working up to his more successful/award winning titles (dresden files and kitara)

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/293267/kitara

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/187273/dresden-files-cooperative-card-game Michaeleconomy (talk) 23:29, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, BGG and The Dice Tower (the latter I also subscribe to) are self-published (please see Wikiproject) and unreliable. IMO an article needs more reliable sources with editorial control. Replying to the other comment, I do not think so, although in my opinion an article should be all right if it has two multiple, reliable, indepedent sources, or won (or is nominated) to a SdJ. While I could concur that this is "relevant to understanding Vogel's progress as a game designer", unless you provide more reliable refs, I am unconvinced that this is notable. Many thanks for your time and help! VickKiang (talk) 23:35, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:42, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge&redrect to Eric B. Vogel. The article as written fails WP:GNG (we don't have a Wikipedia:Notablity (games), at best, Wikipedia:Notability (products) can offer some futher insight. Is The Dice Tower video review reliable? They are high profile, but not high enough to prevent the article about this show from being merged to the stubby biography of the podcasdter in 2018 (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Dice Tower (2nd nomination)). Unless we can find more high profile reviews or awards (BGG shows nothing), this is not a notable game. At best we can merge the one liner description of the game to the designer, who has a page (although whether he meets WP:NBIO, that's another discussion): Eric B. Vogel --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:50, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I subscribe to loads of YouTube channels on games, namely SUSD (which I am more familiar with) and Watch it Played; I probably subscribed to Dice Tower sometime ago, or came across on BGG but think all of these are well known and review thousands of games in total! But all of these Youtube channels are probably unreliable, much less notable IMO, so I agree with your assessment. VickKiang (talk) 08:59, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD discussion includes a proposal for merger to Eric B. Vogel, and a notice of the proposed merger was posted to that page on June 25. As such, this AfD discussion may need to be extended or relisted to incorporate input from that page. Thanks, Kevin McE (talk) 14:43, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 03:20, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A number of reviews are listed here: [1]. That said, I'm fine with a merge to the author. Hobit (talk) 10:52, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, while Dice Tower has mostly one face, it's a pretty big organiation at this point. [2]. It's also widely respected in the field. I'd say it is very reliable in its area (board games etc.). Hobit (talk) 10:58, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your point is interesting, but below is a source table; at best, there's one source meeting GNG, and two unsures, so merging or deleting are both fine to me.

**Source assessment table: prepared by User:VickKiang**
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.rollthedice.nl/	Indepedent.	? The source is a board game association, but doesn't seem to have editorial policies.	The source covers the subject in detail.	? Unknown
http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/keirat/txt/A/Armorica.html	? It's indepedent (?) but sponsored ("Many thanks to Vainglorious Games for sending us a review copy!")	Self-published blog, dated design, not reliable.	The source covers the subject in detail.	✘ No
https://rivcoach.wordpress.com/2010/09/25/review-armorica-by-vainglorius-games/	It's indepedent probably, but the site's deleted.	Deleted self-published site on Wordpress	? The article could not be opened (as "rivcoach.wordpress.com is no longer available").	✘ No
https://www.jedisjeux.net/jeux-de-societe/	The subject is indepedent.	An association that seems reliable enough, but somehow Google translate doesn't work well, and as I can't read French, I am not sure whether there's an editorial policy. But it's all right and probably reliable.	The article discusses the subject in detail.	✔ Yes
http://detafelplakt.skynetblogs.be/archive/2010/07/20/kleine-dingen.html	The subject is indepedent presumably, though it can't be accessed on my laptop.	Blog, also couldn't be opened on my laptop.	? Ref couldn't be accessed for me, but it's unreliable as it's a self-published blog.	✘ No
http://spotlightongames.com/list/nights/a.html#armorica	The subject is indepedent.	Self-published, no editorial policies.	Short, but in-depth enough.	✘ No
https://www.dicetower.com/game/67285/armorica	The subject is indepedent.	YouTube channel turned into webpage, marginally reliable for mundane coverage, including gameplay, release date, publisher..., generally unreliable for subjective reviews, and doesn't contribute to GNG as it's routine.	Long review.	✘ No
http://www.boardgamenews.com/index.php/boardgamenews/comments/bring_gauls_and_romans_together_in_armorica/	The subject is indepedent.	? It seems to have about section and an editor, but the author now posts on BGG, which isn't reliable.	Fairly long article.	? Unknown
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

The other refs, including BGG link and the publisher's link, are clearly unreliable. VickKiang (talk) 22:28, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

- I largely agree with you other than Dice Tower. That it started on YouTube as a one-person show doesn't really matter--it's a non-trivial company at this point, probably the leading English-language board game review site in the world. But it doesn't really matter in this case given we both want the same outcome. Hobit (talk) 10:20, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Lots of comments but only one editor advocating a Merge and redirect. Other opinions?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:53, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment IMO I initially voted for delete, but as of right now I think both deleting and merging are fine. VickKiang (talk) 05:18, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would note that Piotrus did propose merge to the author as an alternative to deletion, to which Hobit agreed, and now the nominator as well. I have no opinion at the moment, but if it helps to establish a consensus then I would lean merge as well. BOZ (talk) 12:54, 7 July 2022 (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.