Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brasilia Tropicalis
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 of the debate was Delete (aeropagitica) (talk) 15:44, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Brasilia Tropicalis
Video game in development by a couple of guys for some contest. They don't even have a publisher. And, icing on the cake, zero google hits. Extreme delete. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 04:30, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. as unverifiable WP:V.--Blue520 04:42, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:V, WP:SOFTWARE, and WP:Crystal ball --TBC
??? ??? ??? 04:45, 3 April 2006 (UTC) - Delete. Nonnotable, ad, etc. NTK 05:26, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per above. --Khoikhoi 07:12, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. non-notable, unverifiable, crystal ball, advertisement, and probably vanity too (how else could the editor know so much about a game that hasn't been released yet?) --Icarus 08:15, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom, lack of verifiabilty. --Alan Au 09:01, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, nn game, unverifiable. --Terence Ong 13:35, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, although props to the article writer for having the stones to declare a subject with zero Google hits "notable." RGTraynor 16:41, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
- Keep, article author here. Can't argue the standards by which a deletion is judged, but some clarification is in order. (1) I am one of the developers. (2) All three of us are industry professionals working full-time on VC-funded games. Googling my screenname 'Darien Kane' will return some articles and past projects by me. (3) JogosBR ('GamesBR' in Portuguese) is an initiative from the brazilian government to award original game proposals, game demos and complete games with robust cash investments (link is provided). I'm not affiliated with the government, but given the novelty of this practice, I believe JogosBR should in fact have an article of its own. (4) The prize encompasses self-publishing (hence the 'TBA' on the 'Publisher' field). (5) Zero Google hits is due to zero advertisement. (6) The notability of this article is not anchored to whether or not the game gets released or wins the contest (i.e. crystal balling); rather, it lies in the PhotoRank feature - which represents a paradigm shift in our industry - and to a lesser extent, in-game pedagogy. These two topics have been sparking debates among our peers, fans, collaborators and overseas partners (hence me posting on en.wikipedia.org instead of pt.wikipedia.org). I'm willing to rewrite the article to reflect that its less of an ad and more of a case study in social computing and e-learning (at least in Brazil). Thiago Aiache 20:58, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. Promo spam. David Hoag 07:08, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- I have vigorously revamped the article to focus on the issues surrounding the game. Please review. Thiago Aiache 12:13, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: I just did reread it, and found no external links or references that would establish the notability of the game ... nor, with zero Google hits, am I much surprised. Since Brazilian sites reflect on Google -- I have an ex in Sao Paulo with whom I am in touch -- it seems to me that Occam's Razor applies: plainly this "PhotoRank" is an extremely flawed yardstick by which notability can be gauged. Perhaps you could supply some links pointing out where these debates are actually taking place? RGTraynor 13:45, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: I can only link to the lecture transcripts from the event where these issues were first debated, in middle March. It was the 'Conferência de Desenvolvedores de Games-Rio', which literally translates to Rio Game Developers Conference. The site is www.cdgrio.com.br. Transcripts (rather lenghty ones) are in Portuguese, but your friend from São Paulo can attest to their legitimacy. If this is still insufficient proof of notability, I can only ask that the article is moved to my User Space, as per one of the editors' suggestion. I kindly request that a redirect is provided, as I have linked the article on the document we submitted to the JogosBR contest. Thiago Aiache 19:59, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- A directed Google search of that site you provided resulted in no hits for Brasilia Tropicalis, in Portuguese or otherwise. [1] RGTraynor 21:00, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- Transcripts are downloadable files, thus precluded from Google searching. They can be opened from http://www.cdgrio.com.br/modules/wfchannel/index.php?pagenum=30 Thiago Aiache 21:13, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- A directed Google search of that site you provided resulted in no hits for Brasilia Tropicalis, in Portuguese or otherwise. [1] RGTraynor 21:00, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: I can only link to the lecture transcripts from the event where these issues were first debated, in middle March. It was the 'Conferência de Desenvolvedores de Games-Rio', which literally translates to Rio Game Developers Conference. The site is www.cdgrio.com.br. Transcripts (rather lenghty ones) are in Portuguese, but your friend from São Paulo can attest to their legitimacy. If this is still insufficient proof of notability, I can only ask that the article is moved to my User Space, as per one of the editors' suggestion. I kindly request that a redirect is provided, as I have linked the article on the document we submitted to the JogosBR contest. Thiago Aiache 19:59, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: I just did reread it, and found no external links or references that would establish the notability of the game ... nor, with zero Google hits, am I much surprised. Since Brazilian sites reflect on Google -- I have an ex in Sao Paulo with whom I am in touch -- it seems to me that Occam's Razor applies: plainly this "PhotoRank" is an extremely flawed yardstick by which notability can be gauged. Perhaps you could supply some links pointing out where these debates are actually taking place? RGTraynor 13:45, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- 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.
