Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Out of the Park Baseball

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 Keep. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-11 12:17Z

[edit] Out of the Park Baseball

Out of the Park Baseball (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Non-notable computer game. Only one article cited that discusses this game. Fails WP:SOFTWARE. Valrith 22:02, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

• Keep and expand. The article as it stands is pretty poor, but the game has been the subject of pretty widespread coverage, and I'll be glad to expand it once things aren't quite so crazy here at work (maybe in a week or so?). This review in the San Francisco Chronicle is pretty extensive, as is this review in PC Gamer, and this article in the Washington Post cites it as the leading baseball front office sim. There are also off-line articles on the game in Computer Gaming World (7/7/01), Macworld (October '06), as well as web reviews in sites like Gamespot[1], GameSpy[2][3], etc. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 18:45, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 19:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per Hit bull, win steak's reasoning. Mathmo ^Talk 23:54, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
• keep and expand per HBWS. — brighterorange (talk) 03:36, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete no notability shown Fotografico 04:39, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep and close There is a big and phat list of sources provided above, here is a gamesindustry.biz article covering Sports Interactive's acquisition of Out of the Park, so even that can be referenced. QuagmireDog 11:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep this game is more notable that you might think. Updated every year (OOTP2007 being released in March) and subject of press articles as noted above. --CPAScott 00:39, 11 February 2007 (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.