Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Broken Metal

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 delete. ⇒ SWATJester On Belay! 19:10, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Broken Metal

Broken Metal (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Fails to satisfy notability as per WP:SOFTWARE. This was pointed out in a prod, which was removed without comment or addition of references/sources. Marasmusine 14:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Comment - Please note that WP:Software is still under review so it should not be used as a rationale for keeping or deleting an article. →Bobby← 15:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
This matter was replied to on my user talk page, it seems the user has not read this.Kangphil 14:45, 9 March 2007 (GMT)
  • Delete: the problem is not the quality of the page, it is that there are no reliable sources for the information mentioned as required by attribution. --Pak21 15:08, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep: A link to reviews has been added to the page and a significant number of players participate. .Kangphil 15:16, 9 March 2007 (GMT)
The source added would appear to be a self-published source, which does not mean attribution's requirement of being a "reliable published source". Cheers --Pak21 15:22, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

If you search google for for the game you will not be able to find many reviews for the game. If someone external to the game has written a review that isnt on the internet, nor does a page come up in the search, the wiki-page cannot exist? In america it may well have been printed in a local paper, but i cannot provide such a reference for i do not live in the U.S. .Kangphil

The burden of proof is on editors who wish to add or retain information to show that reliable sources, either online or offline, exist, not on the editors suggesting that information be removed to show the sources do not exist. Cheers --Pak21 15:44, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - In this case, we're going to use the Alexa test. The game's url is ranked nearly 4,000,000. Only 15 pages link to Broken Metal. The fact of the matter is that at this moment in time, the site has not obtained enough notability to have its own page on WP. →Bobby← 15:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Even so, over 18,000 people have played broken metal since it started, that is not counting the deletion of inactive accounts..Kangphil 15:47, 9 March 2007 (GMT)

Comment - As far as I can tell, the game has not had 18000 players unless every hit to the page is a unique player. I'm sorry, but 18K hits over the past 4 years equates to only a dozen hits a day. As it stands now, there could be 12 people who go online everyday. I'd also like to point out that the site is declining in popularity relative to other sites (based on the fact that its rank has dropped about a million in the last few months). I would like to remind Kangphil that it is advisable for a page's author to identify themself when participating in an AfD discussion. I understand the frustration of losing an article that you've put a significant amount of time into, but I would encourage you to focus your enthusiasm towards a more notable topic. →Bobby← 16:13, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Comment I was refering to the number of accounts and thus players it has. ..Kangphil 16:24, 9 March 2007 (GMT)
  • Comment After discussion with Kangphil, I decided to have a quick look for sources myself; the nearest I could find was a brief review here, but I don't know how reliable pc.gamezone.com is. Marasmusine 16:10, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment/Question - Gamezone is a fairly large vg review and info site. However, if I recall correctly, they allow user submitted game reviews. I can't look at the link you posted through my company's filters, but could you determine who wrote the article? →Bobby← 16:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
      • It doesn't say either way, unfortunatly. Not even a reviewers name. Marasmusine 18:13, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Here is the list of reviewers. If that helps at all? Kangphil 18:59, 9 March 2007 (GMT)
  • Delete as NN. Just another obscure webgame, and speaking as an online game player, I concur with Bobby that 18K hits over four years would have been a pathetic level for a game on a dedicated university server twenty years ago. There's no there there. RGTraynor 16:24, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Comment 18,000 is the number of accounts in the game, not site hits.Kangphil 16:34, 9 March 2007 (GMT)
Fair enough. Could you provide us with verification of that? RGTraynor 17:29, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes, on the home page of Broken Metal here it gives the number of accounts, and the number of ships. These numbers are to the right of the log-in box. Kangphil 18:42, 9 March 2007 (GMT)
Observation - We really need to see some more independant coverage of the game in order to try and insure that the topic is notable and the facts can be verified. Without these outside sources, I honestly don't see keeping the article. →Bobby← 19:44, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment I have contacted someone to see if they are willing to try the game and review it, they are from the website mentioned earlier. Kangphil 18:59, 9 March 2007 (GMT)

  • Hrm. You mean the site claims to have 8,000+ (not 18,000) accounts. I was hoping for independent verification myself. Beyond that, getting someone from a website to review a game doesn't count for much. Please review the criteria from WP:WEB and let us know which elements of that your site meets. RGTraynor 20:37, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
    • My mistake i mis-read. If you won't wait for the site to the become applicable then there's nothing i can do, and i will stop editing it, and contributing to wikipedia until it does. Kangphil 20:45, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. No evidence of the webgame being "subject of multiple and non-trivial published works". --TBCΦtalk? 22:20, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete no indication of notability and no reliable sources that I can see at the 450 GHits [1]. As a browser game probably fails the specific WP:WEB as well as WP:N. Nuttah68 22:21, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment: Beyond which ... Alexa reports that this site gets only 11 hits a day (by contrast, the modestly popular game I play gets nearly seven hundred times the traffic). Moreover, when I clicked the Wayback Machine to the first known views in April '03, the game was already claiming nearly 800 accounts. [2] The week it went live? I don't think so. RGTraynor 00:37, 10 March 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.