Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Fellowship (Ultima)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. — Scientizzle 15:47, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The Fellowship (Ultima) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Failure to meet the general notability guideline of independent coverage in reliable sources. No references exist to assert notability. Only sources about Ultima games in general. Thus fails WP:N. Randomran (talk) 05:52, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game related deletions. MrKIA11 (talk) 12:45, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per several policies. For extensive argumentation, see User:Krator/Gamecruft. User:Krator (t c) 13:18, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Delete because no sources assert notability. Does anybody have a copy of the referenced issue of Game Developer magazine, perchance? ZappyGun (talk to me)What I've done for Wikipedia 13:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as the original article author. A strong plot element in one game (U7BG), and heavily referenced in two others (UU2 (I think, I haven't actually played it =) and U7SI), plus a few other scattered remarks... but that's about as far as notability goes, and it's not pretty. The Editable Codex article is already vastly more extensive than this... --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 16:39, 29 May 2008 (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.