Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DISCover
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Legobot (talk | contribs) at 17:16, 19 March 2023 (Bot: Fixing lint errors, replacing obsolete HTML tags: <font> (3x)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.Revision as of 17:16, 19 March 2023 by Legobot (talk | contribs) (Bot: Fixing lint errors, replacing obsolete HTML tags: <font> (3x))
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
- 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. This is a Secret account 02:10, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reads like an advertisement, no sources cited, however the topic does seem to be discussed in various gaming publications. Is this software notable enough to sustain a Wikipedia article? GTBacchus(talk) 18:55, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete unless notability can be established. Subdolous 19:05, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per above. Noor Aalam 19:15, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per the original posters comment of "the topic does seem to be discussed in various gaming publications." If a gaming console that's discussed by gaming publications doesn't meet wp:nn it's time to fix wp:nn. My general opinion is that if the niche crowd (in this case gaming publications) finds the topic notable it is notable. Leave notability to the experts not the unwashed masses :-) Hansonc 20:16, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Hence the "unless notability can be established." The sources need to be presented. A statement by a wikipedia user that it "does seem to be discussed in various gaming publications" is not a secondary source. Subdolous 20:36, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- True that. My comment was based on some extremely cursory googling. The question is whether there's enough coverage in gaming publications to support an article. Is this article from GameSpot a reliable source, for instance? -GTBacchus(talk) 20:39, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Hence the "unless notability can be established." The sources need to be presented. A statement by a wikipedia user that it "does seem to be discussed in various gaming publications" is not a secondary source. Subdolous 20:36, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep per Hansonc. 132.205.99.122 20:54, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, need sources integrated. I remembered this er, console from a few years ago getting coverage from PC gaming places. I took several minutes to search for sources: [1],[2], [3], [4], [5] (though it's an editorial-like piece by the CEO), [6] (Press release of their partnership with firingsquad.com) all with Googling "discover gaming," "discover console," and "discover firingsquad." These should be considered for integration into the article and the article neutered from any promotional tone. There are a few smaller "future tech" mentions of DISCover in various reliable sources; I'm not sure if they can be considered though. --CRiyl 21:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- That was a good edit. -GTBacchus(talk) 20:38, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. Hopefully the article now stands a chance of not entering WP oblivion. --CRiyl 01:08, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Almost every HP Media Center PC now comes with this software. ≈Alessandro ♫ T • C 03:59, 3 November 2007 (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.