Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NProtect GameGuard

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. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:06, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NProtect GameGuard

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

DELETE non-notable software product which appears to be lacking in non-trivial coverage from reliable third party publications. JBsupreme (talk) 18:08, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 20:12, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Somewhat notable. There might be good sources for it not working on Win7. Fix it up and remove some excess info, then see what it looks like. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 20:54, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Short of removing 98% of the current content I'm not sure how it can be fixed. It is relying completely on primary sources and forums, like this one: [1] JBsupreme (talk) 05:43, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Did you try searching for sources? According to the WP:VG google search engine, there are a few reliable sources.[2][3][4][5]. Need I say more? _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 16:00, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - Although please be wary of press releases, or re-iterations of press releases, as some of these links appear to be. They don't count towards notability. Marasmusine (talk) 17:30, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and clean-up. The fact it is indeed used by many pieces of software that are notable themselves should provide this with notability. Whilst the current sourcing is not strong, it still shows notability and verifies claims in the article. --Taelus (talk) 08:51, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 10:22, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I agree there currently aren't enough good sources in the article, but Google returns about 184,000 results: [6] (Yes, I know this doesn't establish notability). But if 184,000 websites talk about Gameguard, there's bound to be magazines, books, etc. out there that do the same. However, Gameguard is mainly active in Korean RPGs (I believe it's in MOST of them, actually), and I'm not in South-Korea, nor do I speak the language, which makes it difficult (for me) to find good sources. --DanielPharos (talk) 10:29, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - This is indeed the issue that I presume is the problem here, its notability comes from alot of non-English usage, and as such the sources out there are probably not in English. Perhaps we could attempt to find someone who speaks a relevant language to dig around for sources? It would be a shame to delete an article just because it isn't covered in depth in the western world. --Taelus (talk) 16:12, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I found this information very useful while I was beta testing the game Aion and petitioned for a full refund due to GameGuard being utilized. --Shawnshekari (talk) 22:14, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to INCA Internet. A lack of reliable, third party coverage (just press releases such as [7]) Extremely weak sources (almost entirely forums?). I consider the large list of "known games running GameGuard" and "known blocked applications" to be indiscriminate information. There's a small amount of verifiable information that can be included in the company article, per WP:PRODUCT. Marasmusine (talk) 15:51, 2 October 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.