Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Globulation 2 (2nd nomination)

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. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 04:32, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Globulation 2 (2nd nomination)

Globulation 2 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

This article was deleted before but a deletion review asked to seek for more input than the first AfD nomination, so let's hope this discussion generates more interest. Not from me though, this is a procedural nomination, I have no opinion. ~ trialsanderrors 07:21, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Comment Where are the reliable sources? Guy (Help!) 10:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - not notable per WP:SOFTWARE and no sources or anything else to show notability. Jayden54 15:20, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Some references have been added. --nct 10:41, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - Naturally any free, open-source Linux game is going to have far less coverage than a PC game with advertising-sponsored media, so one most consider the notability of a product in this market in that context. I believe it is notable given the relatively limited number of games for Linux machines, and the review I found at http://linux.about.com/od/softgame/fr/fr_Globulation2.htm as well as a number of user-rating sites (e.g.: http://www.happypenguin.org/show?Globulation%202 ) that suggest to me that it's in the top-tier of usage for its market. Stop teh Linux h8 :( Tarinth 18:06, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep: notable free software game. 28,800 Google hits for "globulation -wikipedia". --Michalis Famelis (talk) 19:12, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete No claims of notability. Looks like fun and I am a big fan of open source software but this does not seem notable. There are many many non-notable commercial games that never became popular or notable and there are many notable open source software packages (such as Gimp, Linux, VLC media player, etc. It is true that open source games are at a disadvantage since there is no marketing muscle behind the, but the solution does not involve using wikipedia as a free advertising platform.--Nick Y. 23:21, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Nick, my comments above were not intended to suggest that WP provide an advertising channel for these products--simply that one needs to consider the notability of products differently, since you won't be able to go by the reviews and advertising that pay the bills within the gaming media. Tarinth 15:48, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Point taken. Still there should be some sources to indicate it's popularity within the open source game community.--Nick Y. 19:33, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I had given several indice sof such popularity (distrib inclusion, linux journal article, ...) in the request for undeletion (december 2006), but it looks like the page has disappeared, does anyone know how to retrieve it? --nct 10:17, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I have added some references on the page, both for popularity among open source community and some review of the game system. As the game is open source, the most precise reference on how the game works is the source itself. --nct 10:37, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
*Weak Keep The citations added need to be cleaned up using proper formatting and placed in a more logical place, but they barely save this from afd for me. --Nick Y. 07:46, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I've played this. It's one of the better games available on linux, afaik. I don't consider myself an expert though, so I daren't say keep or delete. Kim Bruning 00:46, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per Tarinth and Michalis Famelis. It seems notable in its market. There are many websites mentioning it, and there is an active userbase. Brendan Alcorn 04:52, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
  • KEEP The article needs work, but I'm pretty sure the info shown at http://globulation2.org/wiki/Trackback would make it be considered notable. It's a stub, not an AfD. I also put a blurb on it's talk page --Appleboy Talk 22:14, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Is a major Free Software RTS CyrilleDunant 09:54, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep For the same reasons I ask for its undeletion (decembre 2006) --nct 10:21, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep : enough evidences of third-party reviews. Rama 13:51, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep : It is the best free strategy game I know. Optimix 14:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep: I discovered Globulation here, and I've come to agree that it's one of the most notable open-source RTS games. Incidentally, the archived Deletion Review is available here, you must click on 'show' to view it. vasi 15:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep : Globulation is alpha cause nobody cared about a difference of alpha or beta. Next release will be beta or 'final' due to this non-sense notability discussion around this 'alpha' (is there any final software out there?). In my eyes it is the best free strategy game I know and I know for example Wesnoth, Stratagus, Freeciv. It has a unique way of controling units allowing to handle 1000 (many more if it would allow for more units on one team) units at a time. --Giszmo 16:03, 6 January 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.