Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KDice (2nd nomination)

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 keep. MBisanz ^talk 03:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

KDice

Non-notable web game. Only a single reliable source. Delete per WP:WEB and WP:CORP as they require multiple sources. Peephole (talk) 21:07, 30 January 2009 (UTC) (categories)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 22:23, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak~~ Keep. Passes WP:WEB with coverage in major game-related review sites, TechCrunch, Kotaku, Jay is Games], etc. Same sites also help it pass WP:CORP. It's not the strongest show of support something could have, but it's something. (it has been covered in DIGG, & Metafilter, too...). SpikeJones (talk) 21:31, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE: Changing my aforementioned "weak keep" to "keep". kdice was nominated for a techcrunch "crunchie" award, as was covered in the San Francisco Chronicle. And Channel Register cites kdice as an example of Google-related programming. SpikeJones (talk) 04:13, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: WP:WEB requires the website to have actually won the award. Second link is yet another trivial mention. --Peephole (talk) 04:25, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: WP:WEB says the coverage needs to be non-trivial. Which means it needs to be more than "a brief summary of the nature of the content or the publication of Internet addresses". And that's pretty much what the TechCrunch and Kotaku articles are. --Peephole (talk) 21:43, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: just about meets notability and has sufficient sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jofakēt (talk • contribs) 22:16, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Can you elaborate on how you think it meets notability criteria? --Peephole (talk) 22:19, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Found some sources on this one pretty easily, which I've added. I'm confident there are more out there. This game has attracted a lot of attention from people in the industry. Randomran (talk) 22:54, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Both the sources ([1], [2]) you provided, contain little more than trivial coverage. --Peephole (talk) 22:59, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - The first source "sort of" passes WP:WEB, as it is an award (albeit not a well-known one). In that sense the brevity of the mention can be forgiven. SharkD (talk) 04:18, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - [3] -- penubag (talk) 00:34, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment:Alexa is not a reliable source, that establishes notability. Especially when its ranking isn't even that great.--Peephole (talk) 01:28, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the first 2 meet WP:V to show the game exists, but fail WP:GNG and WP:WEB to show it's a notable game. The last to sources should be removed per WP:RS or shown that their publications have been backed up by an actual reliable source.じんない 03:02, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Gamasutra (I'm assuming that's the source you're talking about) is considered reliable within our project per previous consensus. SharkD (talk) 04:23, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I'm satisified with the outside coverage that has been presented here. SharkD (talk) 04:24, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Sufficient sources now for notability, but I suspect more can be gotten with some extensive searching. --MASEM 23:53, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep This page doesnt break any guidelines or policies to my point of knowledge PSNMand (talk) 23:54, 3 February 2009 (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.