Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FCIV.NET

FCIV.NET

[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)

Lacks notability, only 1 article that the author probably wrote themselves Mvcg66b3r (talk) 18:58, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Software. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 18:58, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Does not meet WP:GNG Komskie (talk) 19:01, 5 March 2023 (UTC) — Komskie (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:48, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Don't delete: I strongly object to deleting this Wikipedia article about the game FCIV.NET. The article is of sufficient notability, because it is written about an actual unique game called FCIV.NET. The game has real players who regularly play the game. FCIV.NET is a 3D fork of the game Freeciv, which is separate and distinct from the game Freeciv. The article does cite an external reference from civfanatics.com, which was published by civfanatics.com independently. I am trying to make a positive impact in the world by running the FCIV.NET project, with the goal to make a 3D version of Freeciv. Therefore please don't delete this article. The article about FCIV.NET should stay, because it describes an actual, real free and open source PC game that players can play, and the game has been described by other external sources, such as civfanatics.com. I have added additional external sources, such as https://freeciv.fandom.com/wiki/FreecivWebClient which describes FCIV.NET
- "only 1 article that the author probably wrote themselves" - This is a FALSE statement. The article on civfanatics.com was not written by the author, this article was published by civfanatics.com independently. Nybygger — Preceding undated comment added 20:14, 5 March 2023‎ (UTC) by the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD. [reply]
Delete Simply being a game that exists does not qualify something for Wikipedia, otherwise it would be inundated with advertising and spam. While I respect the decision to make it free/open-source, it still needs significant coverage from WP:RS in the press. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:41, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is a possible redirect target (main Freeciv article - the article subject is mentioned in its lead). Pavlor (talk) 10:22, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Freeciv as WP:ATD. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 11:01, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Don't Delete and Don't Redirect to Freeciv FCIV.NET is a separate project from Freeciv, because FCIV.NET uses the Three.js 3D engine, has 3D graphics and is a browser game, and a separate project on GitHub. Freeciv is a 2D desktop game. FCIV.NET is a good, positive and fun, free open source browser game. Wikipedia should encourage new up-and-coming art and games, which has only modest mentions still on the Internet. Please help encourage new games and art projects online, not censor projects like FCIV.NET. This is an example of an independent news source covering the game: https://www.civfanatics.com/2022/12/19/fciv-net-december-2022-showcase/ Further, the game is notable because it is an alternative to the Civilization games, is free, in 3D and can be played online in a browser, unlike the commercial Civ games. Thank you. Nybygger 21:18, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: If you can show that FCIV.NET has been the subject of significant coverage from independant, reliable sources, I will change my vote. The game being good, or positive, or fun, or new does not make it notable. -- Mike 🗩 21:21, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As already said by others, it is lacking significant coverage. Vestigium Leonis (talk) 15:17, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]