Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robo Rampage

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:08, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Robo Rampage

[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)

Zero in-depth sourcing showed up in searches. Was a redirect, but was restored as a result of an RfD: Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2025_May_27#Robo_Rampage. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:19, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Switzerland. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:59, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is all very much pro forma here, we are nominating a one sentence article. Delete. IgelRM (talk) 18:50, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I haven't found any secondary coverage in a web search. For context, this was BLARed and then RfD'd. The RfD [1] resulted in consensus against a redirect, but no consensus on what alternative (restore as article or delete) to take, so the article was restored. It was then PRODed, which was contested with the argument "redirect as preferred alternative" and BLARed, but because there was consensus at RfD against a redirect the article was restored again. So, after visiting every deletion venue under the sun, we end up here.

@1234qwer1234qwer4, Pppery, Fancy Refrigerator, Helpful Raccoon, and Kvng: Pings to those involved in the aforementioned saga. Toadspike [Talk] 09:02, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Thryduulf, Tavix, Steel1943, and Enix150: Ping RfD participants as well, as some opined on notability and they are (for better or worse) the folks who sent this article back here. Toadspike [Talk] 09:05, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It could likely have just been deleted at RfD using plain common sense but since it's here and has to be explicitly clarified: it fails WP:GNG. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:06, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to MiniClip as reasonable WP:ATD. There was no consensus about retaining this redirect in previous RfD and participants there were most concerned about establishing notability, something that is not necessary for a redirect AFAIK. Robo Rampage is now mentioned at the target. ~Kvng (talk) 14:55, 17 June 2025 (UTC) Striking based on new information from Helpful Raccoon ~Kvng (talk) 14:20, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think "no consensus" is how I'd read that close. There was consensus against a redirect, but there was no consensus on what to do instead (restore/delete). On those grounds I am opposed to a redirect here. There is no verifiable content about this game at MiniClip and, since I found zero sources, on it, I doubt there ever will be. Toadspike [Talk] 11:40, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to MiniClip is agreeable, as it is, the article lacks content on its own, and a basic search shows lack of SIGCOV for the game, not opposed to Draftify to give author chance to build more its content.Lorraine Crane (talk) 18:06, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: A redirect is inappropriate. The mentions of this game at Miniclip are unsourced and were added during this deletion saga. In 2011, Miniclip had over 800 games -- there is no reason to mention Robo Rampage unless we add a comprehensive list of hundreds of Miniclip games. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 06:39, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Helpful Raccoon. Also note that I removed the unsourced mentions of Robo Rampage from the article. Xoontor (talk) 14:46, 19 June 2025 (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.