Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DINO HAZARD

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 delete. RL0919 (talk) 06:22, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DINO HAZARD

[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)

I'm very skeptical of this page but I'm listing as AfD rather than CSD in case someone with better Portuguese can find evidence of notability. The page appears to claim notability for a "franchise" consisting of a book, a video game, and a toy figure. They all appear to exist, but I can't find meaningful coverage of the franchise beyond a few passing references to game reviews and blogs reviewing the toys. I don't think it passes WP:GNG as I can't find significant coverage of the franchise itself, separate from the individual products. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 07:06, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 07:06, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Sennecaster (Chat) 14:58, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. Sennecaster (Chat) 14:58, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This is not looking good but it is indeed best-practice to see if Portuguese-reading editors can't dig something out. Ping me if they do, or they don't and this is relisted (at which point I'll probably take a delete stance). My BEFORE is not netting much else, and the current coverage is not impressive (this exists but does not appear to meet WP:GNG). I also wouldn't be averse to draftifying this if the creator comes back and promises to work on this. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:59, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 02:47, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No sources indicating extensive coverage, and this "franchise" is only 5-years-old. Most media that recent have had no time to make an impact. Dimadick (talk) 11:08, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom fails WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 05:50, 24 November 2021 (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.