Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Even the Ocean

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. Sandstein 09:01, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Even the Ocean

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

Fails WP:NVG, as it lacks reliable reviews. GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 18:03, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I found a review from BrashGames http://www.brashgames.co.uk/2016/12/10/even-the-ocean-review/ . Though it is not a explicit review, the Waypoint interview with the developers looks like a positive endorsement: https://waypoint.vice.com/en_us/article/even-the-ocean-is-a-thoughtful-politically-aware-platformer . I have seen scattered reviews written from smaller blogs. The Steam page also has forty-something reviews. These don't count on Metacritic scores, but I would classify them as reliable. Oceanblue44444 (talk) 04:47, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Found some other reviews. A site: https://femhype.com/2016/12/21/even-the-ocean-offers-a-message-of-hope/ , http://thumbthrone.com/games/use-light-and-darkness-to-overcome-obstacles-in-the-story-driven-even-the-ocean/ . A review blog: https://grindingdown.wordpress.com/2016/11/22/in-even-the-ocean-an-unassuming-power-plant-technician-rises-up/ Oceanblue44444 (talk) 04:55, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Outside of Waypoint, those reviews are not reliable. Please see the video game reliable sources page and related custom Google search. czar 06:53, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- BrashGames has an editor-in-chief, while small, it looks reliable: http://www.brashgames.co.uk/about/ . Killscreen has two positive and smaller reviews about the game: https://killscreen.com/playlist/even-the-ocean/ , https://killscreen.com/articles/even-ocean-wants-find-balance-life-next-week/ . I would also like to argue that there are indie games we should keep on Wikipedia, but a fixed amount of space on the reliable news sites, which often goes to AAA games - therefore by solely using these reliable sites as criteria, Wikipedia will not be comprehensively keeping track of indie games. Has Wikipedia considered other metrics such as presence on Steam? Oceanblue44444 (talk) 15:05, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- I would like to also mention of the (possibly not relevant) historical value of having this studio's 2nd game on Wikipedia. Their first, Anodyne, was allowed to remain an article. Oceanblue44444 (talk) 15:16, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  @Oceanblue44444: We are not here to right the great wrong that is indie game coverage. Regarding Steam, that's a primary source (if not a dependent source, vice independent), which does not help establish notability for a topic. Regarding Brashgames, I might suggest requesting feedback on that site at WT:VG/RS (I can't review it at work and that gets it into other person's queues). It may also be useful aside from this article too. --Izno (talk) 12:56, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:32, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 09:24, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The WP:VG/S RS search engine pops up several reliable sources. @Czar: You look like you're just making the comment that you think there are better sources available (since I assume you used the engine). Is that the case? --Izno (talk) 12:56, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well, two points. First, that what constitutes "reliable" is explained on that page, if the editor is interested. Two, that there is indeed coverage, but it's mostly announcements. This game hasn't been reviewed (even in brief) despite releasing in November, which is a sign that it's not notable. At least the Vice article covers its development, though. czar 17:27, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed—a bunch of announcements, but I think there's enough meat in there to indicate notability. --Izno (talk) 22:50, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Enough that we could write something about it, but I don't see enough sources (namely reviews) to cover the topic in adequate depth. I'd suggest putting it in draftspace as a compromise. It's super promotional as written and would need more than just announcements to justify a separate article czar 00:58, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:38, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - While Oceanblue's sources are not convincing, Izno's are. Its not a ton, but its enough to reach the minimum the bar set by the WP:GNG. Sergecross73 msg me 15:43, 16 January 2017 (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.