Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/X Motor Racing (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 no consensus‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:30, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

X Motor Racing

AfDs for this article:

[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)

Having being in sim racing myself, this game fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:NVIDEOGAMES. Still, it was no different from the last nomination when people were playing rFactor but in this era of ACC, this sim is now virtually dead and forgotten. Not to forget WP:SPA (given the editing history of Alexandro sds)

Nothing new since then, other than the roasting by Jimmy Broadbent. SpacedFarmer (talk) 13:48, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. SpacedFarmer (talk) 13:48, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:09, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article says: It has not been reviewed formally by publications and therefore has no Metacritic rating. which is nonsense, as it's been repeatedly and savagely trashed by Joystick [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] but sadly one publisher's coverage is not entering the territory of notability. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 03:31, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Very weak keep I found a mention in The Games Machine and Rock Paper Shotgun. This leads me to think GNG is barely being passed, though it could go either way. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:46, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is a good find and edges it on the razor's edge of notability, great work. It's a shame that the extant sources do not really provide much verifiable information about the gameplay, but I've seen articles with worse sourcing. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 02:29, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: Just enough with the reviews found and the discussion on how bad it is/was, should be notable now. Oaktree b (talk) 15:28, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:26, 4 March 2024 (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.