Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bratz (video game)

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 was keep (non-admin closure), given nearly unanimous keep suggestions. The possibility that sockpuppets ares involved in editing the articles has no relevance to whether or not the topics are notable enough for an encyclopedia article. "per nom" !vote disregarded.Skomorokh 17:05, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bratz (video game)

Bratz (video game) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Non-notable video game. Page created by known sockpuppet. See these SSP reports:

Primary sockpuppets involved Buckcherry91, Princess34, Dream180, Shawty18, Bratz12, Braves3005, Evil3005, Doctor35 Strongsauce (talk) 23:49, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages because they are all non-notable and pages created by known group of sockpuppets

Bratz 4 Real (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Bratz Super Babyz (video game) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Bratz: The Movie (video game) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Bratz Babyz (video game) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Bratz: Forever Diamondz (video game) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Bratz: Rock Angelz (video game) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
  • Keep all per Pixelface. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 05:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep They can't be non-notable if they're covered by multiple reliable sources. Regardless of these socks' actions, these video games have as much right to be here as any others released on consoles and covered by game journos. Someoneanother 05:53, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - Some of the games, namely the last two of the list, are obviously notable. I encourage the nominator to make a narrower nomination. User:Krator (t c) 08:38, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep If they've been reviewed by independent third-party sources, they're both verifiable and notable enough for inclusion. If enough content cannot be found for each individual game to make a solid article then a merge may be suitable. But then again, AfD isn't cleanup as people keep reminding me. Gazimoff (talk) 08:47, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep per Pixelface. It's quite obvious that they're notable. Also, large blanket nominations like this one are generally considered bad form. Celarnor Talk to me 10:10, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment Is the only grounds for notability in Wikipedia being able to prove the game exists? I am asking in honesty as while pixelface does provide several links to aggregate scoring sites Gamerankings and Metacritic, does having one or two reviews make the game notable? I did indeed look at a couple of these reviews before nominating these articles for deletion mainly because there are so very few reviews for these games and most of these sites that review them are not all that notable (sans IGN/Gamespot and a few others). Since Metacritic itself says it tries to cover every single game released in the US/UK, can inclusion into Metacritic be used as a judge of whether the game is notable? Gamerankings also awards 250 points for every article you can add about the game, encouraging their userbase to submit sites that have a review.
  • IMDb lists nearly every single movie that has been made but I doubt that Wikipedia lists every single movie in the IMDb database. However you will always be able to find reviews somewhere of any of these said movies. I think that argument can be applied to videogames mainly because most of the videogames released are of very low shovelware quality.
Whether the films they're based on are notable (they probably are anyway) is a separate issue. The games are separate products and stand or fall on their own merits. I should hope IGN review a lot of games, if we can't get reliable sources to write articles we might as well all pack up and go home. Notability means being the subject of multiple, reliable, in-depth sources. If a game is being reviewed then it's the subject of the source, unless that review is like one of GamesMaster's 6-to-a-page jobbies then it's in-depth, many of the names above are reliable sources. Let's look at them:

Leaves us with:

So in short, we're looking at 5 definitely notable games and one almost certainly notable game. Someoneanother 14:11, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
If that makes these video games notable then I will Withdraw my nomination. Strongsauce (talk) 18:07, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep all - They have established notability. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 16:11, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep and cleanup, and thanks to Pixelface for finding the sources. — brighterorange (talk) 12:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep ChangLimbang (talk) 21:07, 29 March 2008 (UTC) — ChangLimbang (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Keep all - I may abhor the Bratz toy line, but the games do meet any notability requirements. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 23:38, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
    • See, I would have thought somebody called Dread Lord CyberSkull would be a huge Bratz fan. Just goes to show that you shouldn't stereotype people. Everyking (talk) 07:17, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep all, notable. Everyking (talk) 07:17, 3 April 2008 (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.