Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roma Victor (2nd nomination)

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 with addition of references called for. Kim Dent-Brown ^{(Talk to me)} 09:17, 5 July 2007 (UTC) (NB: Not an administrator)[reply]

Roma Victor

Don't see how the game is notable, reads like an ad at points, and others like a guide Kwsn^(Ni!) 04:03, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 09:22, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and cleanup. Definitely notable: see sources [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] etc. JulesH 12:32, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strong cleanup. The article is mostly based in text from RedBedlam's website

KEEP. I have edited the page to remove the factual problems (IE: The pro-Roma Victor lies that riddled the original article)

Delete - Wikipedia should only have game articles for games that are in some way notable. I don't think this one qualifies. -- Hux 12:20, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The only two things that would be reason for deleting (advertisement and notability) are invalid. There is plenty of negative commentary in this article and when more player see this, there will likely be more. For notability, look at the links provided above, there are dozens of interviews of KFR (head developer) and the game on the net. This game has even been in several newspapers (the crucification), that's more than most games. 213.219.173.4 17:04, 3 July 2007 (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.