Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nintendo Connect

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 . Early closure, but no arguments for keep presented and G3 Speedy deletions already completed on the first two items. Marasmusine (talk) 14:30, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nintendo Connect

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

I contested the prod here myself simply because I don't think the reason is accurate. This article appears to be a hoax (albeit a well-done hoax). After searching Google, I cannot find any information about a multiplayer series under this name aside from YouTube rumors. The closest I could come to something under the name Nintendo Connect at all is this, but that's just an e-zine. Erpert (let's talk about it) 19:14, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just added Wii HD to the nomination, which is another article from the same editor. Aside from false positives, the only mention I could find for that supposed console is this, which claims a source from here, an article written in 2008 that speculated the console coming out in 2011. Erpert (let's talk about it) 19:21, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete ~~both~~ all as probable hoax, certainly failing WP:V. For what it's worth, in this article only four months ago Nintendo deny any plans for a Wii HD. In the last few days this author has put in five other unreferenced high-tech articles which are all sitting in CAT:HOAX; and his talk page shows that he has a history of deleted articles of this kind. I have given him a note explaining WP:V and asking for sources; unless some are provided in a day or so, I will bundle up his other articles in another AfD. JohnCD (talk) 20:08, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I understand there is no deadline, but I just went ahead and bundled all those articles because I'm getting the feeling that the editor is creating articles for gaming equipment s/he wishes were in existence. Erpert (let's talk about it) 06:18, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I agree. Amended my !vote to "delete all". I would have extended AGF but for the record in his talk page history of many similar deletions last year. JohnCD (talk) 09:24, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both/all. Unsourced and defying all attempts at verification through Google News/Web. Hqb (talk) 20:53, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Huh? For the second one, Wii HD is a term used by the press. FMasic (talk) 22:36, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but he is using it for a specific "home video game console under development by Nintendo", which he describes in detail; there is press speculation about such a thing but nothing to confirm what this article says and Nintendo have explicitly denied it only four months ago. JohnCD (talk) 09:24, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's what I meant! There are no sources, so it's obvious what to do.... FMasic (talk) 16:23, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. (Search video game sources) • Gene93k (talk) 18:17, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:18, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all Unverifiable/hoax. Reach Out to the Truth 20:50, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all Hoax, but a well put together one at that. --Mithrandir^∞ (Talk!) (Opus Operis) 09:57, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have blown away the Wii HD page and its associated image as a hoax, so you can cross that one off the list. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:53, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Snow Delete - clearly these have no chance of surviving. There are no reliable sources whatsoever that cover these as fact, trivial mentions or not. Wipe them all out and be done with it. --Teancum (talk) 14:50, 27 July 2010 (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.