Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The King of Fighters XIII

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 . Marasmusine (talk) 06:57, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The King of Fighters XIII

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

It's pretty close to WP:HAMMER material, but it does have a source and a title, so I'd bring it here rather than prod it Shadowjams (talk) 10:04, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Common sense keep - Technically WP:CRYSTAL says delete, but if the article (and 1UP, Kotaku, and Destructoid) are to be believed it's going to be publicly demoed in Tokyo on Thursday, at which point there'll likely be a glut of gaming press coverage sufficient for it to pass WP:N. Rather than delete today and recreate on Friday, can we say keep for now, and revisit the issue in early April if there aren't sources by then? - DustFormsWords (talk) 10:49, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right, that's the preview not the full release. If there's a glut of press then I'd agree fully, but let's see what we get over the next few days. Shadowjams (talk) 15:57, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just keep the AfD open for a full week. According to the press release, the official preview event will be held in two days. — Rankiri (talk) 12:49, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. (Search video game sources) • Gene93k (talk) 20:45, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Stifle (talk) 10:39, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - WP:CRYSTAL no longer violated, though I question whether the rest of the article is up to encyclopedic par.--WaltCip (talk) 14:18, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Deleting it now would be a meaningless exercise, technicalities or no. Besides, Mai's behind passes WP:NICEONEDAVE easily. Someone another 03:11, 1 April 2010 (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.