Talk:Crack intro

This article was nominated for deletion on 18 November 2008 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Video games Stub‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game

Stub

This article has been rated as Stub-class on the project's quality scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Elsie Lovelock (7 participants)
Walid Sultan Midani (0 participants)
Federal Disaster Response Agency (9 participants)
Platinum Arts Sandbox (2 participants)
Roobet (1 participant)
Allin Kempthorne (1 participant)
Fuzz Academy (4 participants; relisted)
Spring Engine (3 participants; relisted)
Toon Blast (9 participants; relisted)
Rise of Kingdoms (7 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Featured content candidates

Good article nominations

Ayane (Dead or Alive) (start)
Tetris (nom)
Pokémon competitive play (nom)
Clutch Gaming (start)
Below the Root (video game) (nom)
Painter (video game) (nom)
Pokémon Trading Card Game Pocket (nom)
Kaboom! (video game) (start)
Justice League: Chronicles (start)
Donkey Kong (character) (nom)
Crash Team Rumble (start)
NHL Hockey (start)
Primal (video game) (start)
Ducks Ahoy! (start)
Look Outside (start)
M&M's Kart Racing (start)
Vault 101 (start)
Buffy the Vampire Slayer (2002 video game) (start)

DYK nominations

No did you know nominations

Reviews and reassessments

Articles that need...

Keep this article

I agree with the other editors who support keeping this article. It provides good encylopedic information on a notable subject. I oppose merging or deleting it. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:53, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately it fails WP:V. No evidence was actually provided to show it was notable. Simply claiming it is without providing any sources doesn't actually make it notable. They've managed to find all of 2 trivial mentions of crack intros which sources all of 2 sentences, which means 99% of this is unsourced which means it can't stay here. Numerous people looked for days to try and find sources to defend it and that was all they could come up with. Unless you can provide sources to satisfy the policy requirements the article can't stay the way it is.--Crossmr (talk) 01:55, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article can help establisjh notability, but since it quotes Wikipedia we shouldn't use it as a source I think. --Apoc2400 (talk) 15:55, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An other, but in Swedish: [1]

If you read through the AFD, you'll see that other sources do exist. In Crossmr's reality, they don't though. - hahnch e n 18:13, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]