Wikipedia:Articles for Deletion/The Game (game)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the current talk page.

from VfD: Google for "forgetting game" finds absolutely nothing in this context. -- Chuq 08:22, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

  • Delete. Non-notable, but it's such a cool game idea that I'd love to be proved wrong. - Plutor 11:48, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Weak delete. Non notable, but I did not check all of the 40 links in google. Agree with Plutor. -- Chris 73 Talk 14:10, Sep 30, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep interesting game. notable? depends what that means. it seems as notable as many other things being kept, so keep it. what's the harm? Wolfman 15:22, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep Sounds like an interesting game. but is lacking in notability.--Cspurrier 16:00, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete, non-notable. -Vina 18:36, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete entirely non-notable and a joke to boot. Part of this 'list lots of non-notable things about Hellyer' campaign. Jongarrettuk 20:02, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete, what was this about again? Seems to be part of a series of joke articles. Smerdis of Tlön 20:13, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. The Recycling Troll 20:58, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Amusing, but not notable. — Gwalla | Talk 21:15, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete Dsmdgold 21:44, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep Obviously it has no google hits for such a game, but it is the favourite game of many a Burnie resident, i can vouch for that. And also people elsewhere in the world. ask User:259. Notable, for the fact that its played by so many ppl, and needs to be on wiki, else how would ppl find out about it? Codywilson 04:49, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Comment: Chuq your original comment is a blatant lie. There ARE google hits for this game which is unusual for a game that is so... trivial. So it is notable. one example of this hit is http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Forgetting%20game, and also 'Zero Sum Game' on the same site, to name but a few. Codywilson 04:55, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • http://home.interlog.com/~capco/Metaphysics.htm is another website which has reference to people playing the forgetting game. keep this article Codywilson 04:59, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. If it's on a Wikipedia mirror like TheFreeDictionary.com, then it is definitely a notable topic. Keep TrollQueen 05:26, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
    • Wikipedia mirrors text dump everything from Wikipedia, good or bad. They don't do any content verification. That something is on a Wikipedia mirror (such as TheFreeDictionary) has no bearing on the notability of an article. Delete. RickK 05:37, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep This game is awesome and it was a good thing it was on wikipedia because no where else has it guitar_01
    • This user has been permanently banned for vandalism -- this vote, their first, is the only edit they ever made that wasn't vandalism. RickK 00:24, Oct 2, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Joke. Wile E. Heresiarch 13:56, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep The Game is far from a joke and I know many many players Pritch 14:52, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
    • This is this user's only edit since April 25, and the only edit they have ever made EXCEPT on April 25. RickK 00:25, Oct 2, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep Have to agree with Pritch - definately a real game. Jimbouk 15:24, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
    • This is this user's only edit. RickK 00:25, Oct 2, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete People shouldn't be using Wikipedia mirrors to say that an article is encyclopedic; that would be circular reasoning. --Lowellian 22:02, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete I can't find it on Google, so I don't see any hard evidence that it exists. Codywilson's alledged reference http://home.interlog.com/~capco/Metaphysics.htm almost certainly isn't talking about it. If it exists at all (and perhaps it does now where it didn't before) then it is not the social phenomenon that the article claims. It does sound like a joke to me. --Jll 23:11, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Fiction. Note that most keep votes are from sockpuppets. Gzornenplatz 23:21, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)
  • No vote. Just to mention I found an actual reference to the game at [1], under the name "anti-memory game". Not sure if that's enough to make it notable, though. --Redquark 19:50, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. I can't find any mention that is actually to this game on Google, which is rather unusual for a genuine "social phenomenon". [[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 19:54, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • I'm leaning towards voting delete, but I'd like to suggest asking people from the WikiProject Games here to decide. They are the experts after all :). [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|(talk)]] 21:20, Oct 2, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Just plain silly; subtrivial, not encyclopedic. - RedWordSmith 23:52, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. "... prevalent in the United Kingdom... may have originated at Cambridge University." -- I'm from the UK and know lots of people who attended Cambridge, but have never heard of it. 61 Google hits for "forgetting game" -wikipedia -thefreedictionary, none of which appear to refer to this. (Nothing relevant on groups.google.com either.) I'm also sceptical of User:lamalegend's recent addition ("Other sources claim the game was developed at Hellyer College in Burnie, Tasmania. The game is currently played around the clock in Burnie"). Furthermore, User:217.206.106.154 (no other edits) has changed "of probably obscure 2004 origin" to "of probably obscure 2001 origin" since the page was listed on VfD, presumably in an attempt to increase its apparent encyclopaediality. Sorry, but it looks as though the authors are making this up as they go along, so unless they can present something more concrete than "probably obscure origin", "other sources claim", and "may have originated", I'm voting for deletion. Pnot 00:58, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not notable, joke. Also, I object to the number of sockpuppet votes in favour of keeping. Jayjg 08:26, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Beats poking yourself in the eye with a sharp stick, but DELETE. Denni☯ 17:52, 2004 Oct 3 (UTC)
  • Keep. Some notes:
  1. The reason there are few Google hits for "forgetting game" is because I gave it that name. I didn't know what else to call it. If you don't like my name, change it to anti-memory game or whatever else you wish. I've always heard it just known as "the game", but I wanted a "real" name for it.
  2. The phenomenon is definitely notable enough to have an internet presence, dating back to about July 2004 as far as I could find. I wrote "of probably obscure 2004 origin" because, as far as I could tell, the most likely origin of the game was in 2004. Another user claimed 2001 origin; I cannot substantiate or refute this.
Internet presence at least back to 2003, plus my friends were playing it as far back as 2001 I believe. 2003 ref zoney ♣ talk 16:46, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  1. That this game is featured on a Wiki-mirror is irrelevant and not a case for notability. Anything that is on Wikipedia for long enough will find its way to the Wikipedia mirror sites.
  2. Some of the users who supported this game are dubious (few edits, one vandal). This shouldn't defeat the case for the article. There is plenty documentation that this game is a "real" social phenomenon. Here's another bit of evidence, dated 25 July 2004.
  3. An undercurrent here is that some users resent me with the utterly false suspicion that I am a sock puppet of Mike Church (a brilliant but obnoxious game designer who promoted his work on Wikipedia, and who may have used "sock puppet" accounts) trying to exert influence on Wikipedia. Not only is this accusation false but it's entirely irrelevant when this game is a real and documented phenomenon. 259 22:34, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete - I don't buy that this is some sort of widespread social phenomenon. -- Cyrius|✎ 05:37, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Patent nonsense, belongs to BJAODN. Delete. -- Mike Rosoft 19:52, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
    • Following a couple of valid "keep" votes, I am changing my vote to Abstain. If kept, I'll withdraw the article from BJAODN with an apology. (Though it'll apparently need cleanup.) -- Mike Rosoft 15:31, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Absolutely Keep. My housemate certainly plays this a lot, and a windup LiveJournal entry he wrote consisting of "THE GAME!!! So, who just lost? ;-)" saw more than enough appropriate replies to suggest that it's expanded further than my old flat. It's always known as The Game, though, so possibly add The Game (appropriate identifier) to The Game disambig? Kinitawowi 09:09, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
    In addition to the above, I asked him how long he'd been playing it; he dates it back to 1996 or 1997. Kinitawowi 08:14, Oct 7, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, a whole bunch of people as far afield as Limerick, in Ireland, are addicted to this game. I only found out what "The Game" was by reading this (not sure that's a good thing! I'll keep thinking I've lost! I'd better not tell them I know what it is!) Seriously, evidently this is a bizarre phenomenon that has taken off. Wikipedia is not paper. Leave it harmlessly intact please. zoney ♣ talk 00:15, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. The meme is out of the box now. I loose again! Ouch! :-P Kim Bruning 17:00, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Del, not of verifiable notability. --Jerzy(t) 06:09, 2004 Oct 8 (UTC)

end moved discussion


What?? This article is still here? Despite most of the Keep votes being from the author and his sockpuppets, and using such references as Wikipedia mirrors as their sources? I'm at least going to remove some of the unverifiable crap from the article -- Chuq 04:38, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Let me step in: There are some clearly dubious users who voted for keeping this article-- some had few posts, others were known vandals, one made the laughable claim that an article's being featured on a Wikipedia mirror made it notable. These people may have been trolls, overzealous forgetting-game enthusiasts, or even people who wanted deletion of this article and sought to damage the credibility of the opposing side-- I don't know who they are nor what their motives were. I addressed this in my post.
They surely aren't "my" sock-puppets. I work in politics, and coming up on an election year I have almost zero spare time, certainly no time to play immature, silly games on the Wikipedia. Especially not over a social phenomenon to which I have no real attachment. My friend (with whose identity mine is sometimes conflated here, but in fact we live over 1,000 miles apart, and there's almost a ten-year age difference) taught it to me and said it was popular among some British college students he knew; I verified that he wasn't making it up and wrote the article.
It's fair to suspect that some of the dubious, few-edit users are sock-puppets of some kind. They're not my sock-puppets. I had nothing to do with them. 259 06:27, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Oh, for crying out loud. If this article had been deleted, I would have recreated it. It's real, it exists, and it passed VfD. An article is not just declared deletable if some keep votes come from dubious sources. There can be dodgy delete votes as well, you know. Kinitawowi 09:40, Oct 11, 2004 (UTC)
A couple of comments: By sockpuppet, I wasn't referring to someone with multiple accounts - I was referring to someone who has friends, who are new wikipedia users, whose first actions include numerous edits/votes to VfD articles. I meant the Codywilson/Iamalegend/FiveCents01/Superstoves etc. group - the ones who created Thomas Hatcher/Burnie High School/Neville Windsor etc. Add to that the absense of any mention on the web (under the name of "Forgetting game" that is), and the fact the only "sources" pointed out were wiki mirrors or totally unrelated.
Other web references (under the name "The Game") seem genuine, though it would be good to see even one web page specifically about the game, rather than a blog entry or forum post.
I'm not a deletionist, but I've seen far more useful pages deleted on here.
Zoney's renaming below would be a good idea, at least then people searching for more info won't run up against a brick wall -- Chuq 10:55, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Well, I leant towards a rename in the VfD debate. And a game this memetic is bound to exist in blogs; and constructing a Google search term is next to impossible. :-S Kinitawowi 11:26, Oct 11, 2004 (UTC)

Title

As far as I know, this game is never in real life referred to as anything but "The Game". So I propose we move the page to The Game (game), which sounds crummy, but allows us to do:

[[The Game (game)|]] -> The Game

OK with this move? zoney ♣ talk 10:13, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

  • It needs a retitling, sure; but I don't know if I like The Game (game) - I will, however, run with it in the absence of anything better. Kinitawowi 11:26, Oct 11, 2004 (UTC)