Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Epic duel

Epic duel

Epic duel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

Epic duel is a new multi-player MMORPG game released on December 5, 2009. In my opinion, the game doesn't appear to be notable enough for inclusion on Wikipedia. The article itself is quite a mess and contains a lot of in-universe information. There are no references in the article either. Only two outbound links to the game's website, and the game's own MediaWiki. Phynicen ^"Chat" 12:16, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

• Delete. Google News Archive finds only one article, from a local newspaper. Seems not to meet our notability guideline for web content. EALacey (talk) 12:44, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
• Delete per EALacey - so far not notable. Una Laguna^Talk 14:25, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 15:36, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
• Keep This article is very new, and is unfortunately being worked on by some very inexperienced users. The game itself is also less than a month old, with not a lot of material to write about. The fact that newer, inexperienced writers are mainly editing this article, and the fact that it is brand new means that there is not a lot of sources or material to be written. It might be more useful to wait a while, and make constructive edits or suggestions to the article instead of deleting it just because you don't like it.--Jakkinx Talk to me! 02:10, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Please don't misunderstand - I haven't nominated the article because "I don't like it". The main reason for nominating the article is because there simply isn't enough information about it for inclusion at the moment. As per EALacey, there seems to be only one news article about the game indicating it currently isn't notable enough. Phynicen ^"Chat" 13:59, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

If you wish to remain purely statistical, please try to keep your opinions out of the matter then, unless they are called for. I recently did some clean up work on the article, removing some of the unnessecary in game imformation, and I believe that this and thisrefers to the game? And the primary reason there are not many sources is less than a month old, as I said before. Since you are all outsiders, you can't know that this is the most popular game produced by Artix Entertainment. I advise you to wait a while, then see how it is doing. --Jakkinx Talk to me! 21:48, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Those two examples you gave do not count as reliable sources. The problem with the article, as I said in my assessment, is that right now there aren't enough sources to warrant the existence of an article right now. We don't want to delete it because we don't like it, or we don't care: we want to delete it because the article doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability criteria right now.

You say that the game will receive adequate coverage in coming months - but what if it doesn't? We're not going to leave the article around waiting for the coverage to arrive, because that might never happen. Also remember that being "outsiders" does not disadvantage us - encyclopedia articles are written specifically for "outsiders". If "outsiders" cannot see what makes the article notable right now by reading the article, then there is no reason the article should exist right now. Una Laguna^Talk 23:08, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Jakkinx you seem to not be properly understanding why the article has been labelled as deletion. It is nothing personal at all. It is to do with notability as UnaLaguna has just explained. The normal procedure on Wikipedia for articles like this is to delete until they are notable. Then you may recreate the article when the notability issue has been solved. Basically, it's too soon. Phynicen ^"Chat" 00:07, 20 January 2010 (UTC)