Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trap Adventure 2

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 no consensus. Not a very good discussion - on one hand links to search results are not useful to prove notability (we want the actual sources), but on the other Kotaku and Polygon are clearly reliable sources per WP:VGRS. Sandstein 20:28, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Trap Adventure 2

[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)

Article created by a UPE sock in violation of WMF TOU/policy, A lot of user guides on how to beat levels but very little in the way to establish notability. Still seems questionable given the WP:UPE even if sources were to exist. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 01:17, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was asked on my talk page to restore it (I've had a couple requests for Mayamaya articles since the ban) and I did on the basis that it had a few RSs; no opinion beyond that. --Pres N 01:19, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I dunno, policy is pretty clear on this and I see little evidence this would meet inclusion criteria and in addition to that, it was requested by a sock. The request and restoration should be re-evaluated. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 02:45, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. TMG^talk 05:51, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see no reason to keep this? The whole developer doesn't even seem notable, one of their games even less so. Let them take it to Everipedia.. Alexis Jazz (talk) 07:01, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Generally, developers have a harder time in showing notability, and games are usually more notable than the studio they come from. There are some reliable sources as indicated in the article (Kotaku, Washington Post, Nerdist, Polygon, etc.) Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:26, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm somewhere in the realm of keep and merge and redirect to Super Mario Bros.#Legacy given that sources do exist, though not many and not much in detail. There's maybe scope for a List of Super Mario Bros. clones that might be able to take as mergers from the various other games linked from #Legacy. --Izno (talk) 13:58, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not real fond of #Legacy approach. You must realize how many barely notable games draw influence from something as huge and iconic as Super Mario, right? There'd be lists of games 100 entries long if we gave a shoutout to every little rando game like this. Indifferent to the "clones" proposal - it'd be better, but I don't know if anyone's dedicated to creating that just so we have resolution on this particular article. Sergecross73 msg me 13:49, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'm quite aware #Legacy can problematic for inspiring games, but I think a list of clones would be one way to deal with that since we already have the general legacy article (which is the series article). --Izno (talk) 15:10, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:49, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Izno: a Mario clones article is imho a better solution than individual articles for kind-of-but-not-really notable games like these that seem to be forgotten within weeks. It should probably not be called "clones" though (maybe "derivatives"?) and for a game to be on the list it would still need to meet some notability standards, like this game does, having several reliable secondary sources. Should also be limited to games that have some connection to Mario, this developer has many games that likely even infringe on Nintendo copyright, so it would likely qualify. It should not be a list of all sidescrolling platform games. Alexis Jazz (talk) 23:57, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep because nobody here is noticing THE INSANE AMOUNT OF COVERAGE THIS GAME IS GETTING FROM RELIABLE SOURCES. This search is all the need to prove that. editorEهեইдအ😎 21:49, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ad Orientem (talk) 14:42, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 14:48, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 14:48, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails WP:NOTABILITY. article subjects need significant coverage per the policy. The only reliable sources that mention it are WaPo, ~~Kotaku, and Polygon.~~(Both are blog posts, which are not reliable as a source per WP:RS.) R9tgokunks ⭕ 03:11, 16 July 2018 (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.