Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OpenRPG

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. MBisanz ^talk 03:04, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OpenRPG

Fails WP:V and WP:N, non-notable open source project that is no longer actively developed according to the official website. Based entirely on original research; a quick scan through Google News Archive returns absolutely nothing. The second half is clearly vanity; the last person to edit prior to this AFD was this Greg "Oracle" Copeland guy mentioned many times in the article. I know he's a Battle for Wesnoth developer, but notability is not inherited. Tuxide (talk) 04:03, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 15:25, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete One of many defunct open source projects that never reached the point of being usable. Looie496 (talk) 22:22, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Here's one news aricle: [1]. Further, a Google search turns up ~225,000 hits, which is quite a lot. SharkD (talk) 22:48, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - article's content currently fails basic WP:V policy, and I can't see any significant coverage from a reliable source. Marasmusine (talk) 13:51, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The first article I linked to meets the requirement. SharkD (talk) 04:53, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - It doesn't seem particularly significant to me. Perhaps this falls under Wikipedia:N#cite_ref-3, although I'm not sure which "broader article" it could be mentioned in. Marasmusine (talk) 23:49, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Just because something is no longer currently in the works does not mean it needs to be deleted. (That would be like deleting articles on the U.S. Civil War simply because it's longer being fought.) The article needs some serious citation and possibly even a re-write, but can't we flag it for that? Kallimina (talk) 05:26, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 01:41, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep. OpenRPG was pretty big in its day. Just because the development has stopped does not mean that it has ceased to be notable. Article might need clean-up, but deletion is never supposed to be a solution to that. CaveatLector ^{Talk Contrib} 02:50, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No reliable sources provided, tagged since May last year. --Peephole (talk) 02:10, 22 January 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.