Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hyperiums

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 - keep arguments come from single-purpose accounts, and although they have made a commendable attempt to demonstrate compliance with Wikipedia policy, the case for deletion has adequately demonstrated that the offered sources cannot be considered to meet WP:V and WP:RS. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 20:08, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hyperiums

Non notable webgame, no reliable sources seem to cover it. Fails WP:V, WP:NOR, WP:NOT, WP:WEB and WP:SOFTWARE. Some additional info: Alexa ranking is only 227,093 Peephole 19:08, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

• Comment (Do Not Delete). This game has a cult-like following. Those 4000+ players are insanely devoted to this game. I know this because I play Hyperiums, and have been playing it for +5 years and unless the game is shut down I don't forsee a time in which I'm not playing it. I contributed the bulk of this article and maintain it aswell. Everything on it is relevant to the explaination of the game.--ButtCheeks 7:02, 2 August 2006
• Comment (Undecided). According to their website, they have around 4,300 active players. This one is too close to call for me. --Thorne N. Melcher 22:48, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
• Comment (Do Not Delete). I have played this game for several years; the community has been large and active throughout this time. It has a fair amount of reputation in the online gaming community and attracts much more attention than many wikipedia entries.--Rhythmythyc 1:55, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
• Comment (Do Not Delete But Clean Up). Hyperiums is referenced in various only game directories like www.mpogd.com There has also been articles about it in magazines specialised in video games. Perhaps this artilce should be made shorter to only include a brief description of the game and it's main features. I will not argue whether the game is notable or not but accroding to WP:NNOT notability should not be a criteria for inclusion in wikipedida. And anyway as it can be seen here [[1]] "Alexa rankings are not a part of the notability guidelines for web sites". So according to me the notability argument does not stand and part of the article is in accordance with WP:V, WP:NOR and WP:NOT. Therefore this artilce needs clean up but it should not be deleted. RajivShah 10:34, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: If the article was referenced in game magazines please cite them. --Peephole 13:12, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: A recent reference of the game was in a french game magazine called "Jeux Video Magazine spéciale été" I do not have the URL of the website of the magazine yet (but I am working on getting it). However here is a website where one can find a copy of the article published in that magazine [2]. RajivShah 14:04, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: Here are some other web references of the game: [3], [4] (french),[5] (english). The magazine I previously mentionned does not have a proper website however it has a blog which mentions hyperiums (though it does not give the whole article) [6]. RajivShah 15:05, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment:The first source is a wiki, the next two are simple web listings and the last one is a blog. You need to come up with better sources than that, see WP:RS.--Peephole 15:15, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment:Fair enough but I still have this source [7] (the 2nd link cited) which is an article. The author of the article (the one in wikipedia) has modified it what do you think of the current version? RajivShah 15:48, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment:Here is another source which is not a wiki, not a web listing and not a blog [8] (french) RajivShah 16:29, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment: Isn't that a fansite?--Peephole 18:40, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
      • Comment: Might I remind you that these policies are considered guidelines, not concrete rules?
        • CommentYes, still a website needs to proove its notability to be included on wikipedia.--Peephole 12:26, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
      • Comment: Peephole, even if all my web sources are not good I still have the french video game magazine called: "Jeux Vidéo Magazine hors-series été 2006". A copy of the article can be found here and if you want a proof that this magazine did publish an article on hyperiums you can find it on the blog of that magazine. So based on all of that and everything that has been said before can we not delete this article and some of us will re-write the article based on the article of that magazine? RajivShah 12:45, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
        • Comment:Well, it's something but not much more than a mention in site of the month section. --Peephole 13:30, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
        • Comment: The article of that magazine itself gives more information about hyperiums. RajivShah 16:39, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. Peephole 12:59, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Delete per nom, no notability (asserted or otherwise) and without any real content. RandyWang (^raves/_{review me!}) 02:34, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Further comment: Since when has a fanbase of four thousand people been considered enough to make a game notable? RandyWang (^raves/_{review me!}) 02:37, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Non-notable; no real case being made for keep.--Runcorn 17:22, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
• KEEP, all hyperiums are notable and a readership of 5000 people is enough to make a newspaper or periodical notable!! --64.132.163.178 17:37, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
  • I only count a little over 4000 players (according to the ranking page). Appearantly, Hyperiums is a dying game. Appearantly people do not find the game *that* interesting anymore. Should we have articles about dying games on wikipedia? --86.84.19.107 10:39, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Hyperiums is not a dying game. Because of the game play of Hyperiums there will points in time where there are a lot of players and others where there will be less players (like at the moment). In a month or two SC12 will spawn (those of you who play the game will know what I am talking about) and many players who left the game will come back (as this event will give them a better opportunity to restart). RajivShah 12:44, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
• Not Sure, I checked the pages referenced by this article, and these pages give much more information about this game than this wikipedia page actually does. I therefore believe that just referencing to these pages (to the Hyperiums Nexus page in particular), or removing this wiki article as a whole are both agreeable solutions. --86.84.19.107 7:20, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
  • You need to realize that the original article has been stripped of all "original research" after the deletion debate has started. -- maji

• General issue with gaming entries - I took some time browsing Wikipedia's library of video/computer game entries and a lot, if not all of them are in violation of WP:NOR, especially the spoilers and plot details as well as game character analysis in parts or as a whole. See for instance Irenicus, an article based 100% on original research and conjecture by the author - if any of this information is found somewhere on the 'net or in printed form (game reviews do not go into such detail), it comes from non-notable sources like fanpages or inofficial walkthroughs. What exactly makes top-selling games more equal than apparently less successful ones?
  • Comment Actually, that particular article on Irenicus is indeed pretty awful. But there is an explanation for why a character like Sonic_the_Hedgehog_(character), for example, warrants his own article. It's because the characters of highly well-known video games are notable in and of themselves, independent of their games. Check out the 48 references on that article. Exactly where to draw the line is certainly a controversial issue, but top-selling games are more equal than others on wikipedia, because it is easier for them to satisfy the WP:V requirements. JoshWook 21:05, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Let me point out that the keep voters have mostly just gushed about their favorite game, except for Rajiv. Still, the one source Rajiv found falls short of WP:SOFTWARE which is a pretty sensible standard for inclusion. Mangojuice^talk 16:20, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Thanks for what you said about me. But isn't [WP:SOFTWARE] just a proposed guidline? RajivShah 18:26, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Quite right, but as I said, it's a very sensible guideline, and I endorse it, and I think it has a lot of community support. Mangojuice^talk 14:16, 11 August 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.