Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Virtual pet site

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 redirect to Digital pet#Web-based digital pets. Anyone is free to merge the content from behind the redirect at their leisure. Daniel (talk) 23:48, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Virtual pet site

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

WP:NEO. Most of the sources are primary sources; i.e., the sites themselves. All other sources only cover the individual sites and do not promote the actual term "virtual pet site". Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 05:27, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a dictionary, and this is not an article about a neologism; it's an article about online virtual pets, which obviously exist and have press coverage (particularly Neopets but also FooPets).[1][2][3][4][5][6][7] Having a title that's less than ideal isn't reason for deletion. The only question is whether this needs to be separate from the main article digital pet. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:51, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 16:28, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:28, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:28, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Digital pet#Web-based digital pets. The concept of a "website offering online virtual pets" is undoubtedly notable, but there I'm not sure there is a need for a separate article about this specific concept when it could be covered broadly in our existing article about digital pets; although I would also agree with a keep & improve result. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 19:37, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge to Digital pet#Web-based digital pets. There are enough of these sites with enough coverage that the concept deserves a mention somewhere on the project, the question is whether it should have its own page. If there's enough left after the promotional stuff is removed to support an article, I say keep. Otherwise, take out the promotion and merge what's left with Digital pet. Novusuna ^talk 00:30, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 11:40, 22 December 2013 (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.