Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thievery UT

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. --Daniel Olsen 18:23, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thievery UT

Fails WP:SOFTWARE. Ghits only produces the expected forums, game sites and Wikipedia mirrors. MER-C 10:36, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

• • Please google "Thievery UT" without the underscore, as it gives different (more) results. I don't know if this is a wikipedia bug or not. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 159.134.98.50 (talk • contribs).
• Delete per WP:SOFT, no claim to notability or external sources. Sandstein 20:57, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. -- moe.RON ^{talk | done | doing} 23:07, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable. Daveydweeb (^chat/_patch) 23:46, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: as an ex-player I'd better not vote, however there was one published source: Issue 102 of PC Gamer UK had a whole sidebar covering it [1]. The scan is now broken and the Wayback Machine's copy is faulty, but I remember seeing it way back when and it didn't look Photoshopped. This incarnation of the article doesn't mention it, however, so take that as you will. Garrett^Talk 01:30, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep - In addition, it was covered a few months back in PC Zone as well. The Kinslayer 08:02, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Can you scan either of those two magazines? I checked the magazine archive, but neither issue has been registered as being available. Daveydweeb (^chat/_patch) 10:37, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Wish I could, but I don't have access to a scanner, but I'll look through my back issues tonight and provide an issue number at least. The Kinslayer 10:41, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
      • If you can give me an issue number, I may be able to get scans of PC Zone. - Hahnchen 15:54, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
        • Got it. Issue 167, May 2006, Page 122, bottom left column :D The Kinslayer 16:18, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
          • I do have magazines dating to the mod's release in 2001 but don't have anything recent so I can't get you the scan. - Hahnchen 16:41, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment to [[User:Daveydweeb|Daveydweeb]: Is it so hard to assume good faith and not expect our editors to be lying about such a thing? At the very least, you could just take thirty seconds to make a google search before demanding scan, getting which is somewhat more time-consuming. The search I hope no one seriously considers an idea that a lot of people could be coherently writing on forums since 2002 in a plot to to keep this 2006 article in WP. And this is not the first magazine article about this mod, as mentioned below. CP/M ^comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 10:38, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

• Keep I am a developer, but I'd note that Thievery was last mentioned earlier in the year in a retrospective in PC Gamer UK, and several times before that around its release, in various magazines and websites. I have scans but can't upload them here for copyright reasons. It is primarily notable for being the first multiplayer stealth fps (that we know of) and heavily influenced the multiplayer mode in the Splinter Cell series. External links are in the article. This page is also linked to by the Unreal Tournament page, Mods section. Also, Black Cat Games is now a commercial developer, currently doing Alien Swarm: Infested over the Steam network - furthermore, a commercial sequel (Nightblade) to Thievery is currently in development. I would conclude that this article needs expansion and a notability section, certainly not a deletion, so a removal of this tag would be appreciated.User:RobToujours
  • Comment The above comment by RobToujours was modified by IP editor 83.70.108.85 – see the edit history for specifics. KrakatoaKatie 01:47, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep In the interests of disclosure, I was a level designer on this mod. I agree with Rob, and though I see a value judgement or two in the text that merit editing, I think the Thievery UT page should remain on Wikipedia. I would also like to add something on this specific debate that is relevant to mods in general. Browsing Mod_(computer_gaming), I see plenty of other mods with pages on Wikipedia. I think mods are a very important and culturally significant trend in game development, but talking about them in any kind of "professional" manner is very difficult. They are an online phenomenon, and any intersection with physical media is an adjunct to their existence (such as exposure in print magazines, inclusion on cover discs or Game of the Year editions of the titles they're based on, etc.). In addition to that, the learning and production that goes into a mod is *cultural* practice, rather than *industrial* or *academic* practice. This means there is very little to reference save the mod itself and community websites.User:Nachimir — Nachimir (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Inclusion is not an indicator of notability. MER-C 02:04, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

 AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, KrakatoaKatie 01:47, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

• Question Did that PC Zone source pan out? How about the PC Gamer UK, can anyone confirm that one? If it really has gotten the press (and it's more than a passing mention), then I think it's a keep. If it doesn't have that kind of verification, though, I'm not so sure. Shimeru 08:56, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Reply Yes and no. I have the physical article right here by my keyboard, but I've got absolutely no way to provide any proof that the article exists beyond me saying so! The Kinslayer 22:28, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Keep It can still be listed in bibliographical manner. Seems it's gotten some other press, too. Shimeru 07:35, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
• Clear Keep - This mod is regularly mentioned on major sites. Considering magazines, do the google search and another one - the results mentions that it was reviewed and put on coverdisk. Especially check this one: http://www.ttlg.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-55632.html :

"Check out the October 2002 edition of PC Gamer. On page 116, there is an article about Thievery entitled "The Unlikeliest Mod Ever". It is definitely a positive article describing the mod and also has some comments from the Thief III team. Be sure to check it out!"

And this one: http://www.ttlg.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-55734.html

I'll add that WP:SOFT is a proposed guideline, and nothing more. Of course, it would be a good idea for article editors to add these magazine articles to list of references or further reading. It would also be a good idea for voters/debaters to assume good faith and take 30 seconds to check correctness rather than demand scans. However, here the subject is clearly notable enough.

I think it pretty much sums up this debate. CP/M ^comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 10:38, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

• Keep, but needs more third-party sources to support notability. --Alan Au 22:59, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - per nom. Xdenizen 01:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - IGN Mod Watch entry. ShackNews article. Gamer's Hell article. Torinir _{( Ding my phone My support calls E-Support Options )} 01:05, 7 November 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.