Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Londinivm

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 (and redirect to Roman London), no reliable sources to verify information or notability. Verifiability is a core policy of Wikipedia; whether or not the game has a "huge following" does not trump this. Krimpet (talk) 03:11, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Londinivm

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

Delete - No verifiable assertions of notability. No reliable thrid-party sources, fails WP:WEB as far as I can tell. The latest in a long-line of browser-game articles that either fails to assert, or fails to provide sources in support of notability. Procedural AfD since Admin removed prod stating it has already survived one, although 'survived' seems a strong word considering anyone can simply remove the prod to cancel it. DarkSaber2k 12:23, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. DarkSaber2k 12:26, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Yup, no reliable sources given and none likely to be forthcoming given the lack of relevant Google hits. [1]. —Resurgent insurgent 2007-05-08 12:29Z
  • Delete per Resurgent insurgent, and create a redirect (alternative spelling) to Roman London aka Londinium. --Tikiwont 12:39, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak delete - found the following reference: [2] (gamesindustry.biz). Less convincing reviews are at [3], [4], [5] These are pretty much just games listings sites with user reviews. I think the gamesindustry.biz article is strong, but another good reference would be required to satisfy WP:NOTE. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Marasmusine (talk • contribs) 14:01, 8 May 2007 (UTC).
  • Delete and redirect per Tikiwont. Carlossuarez46 19:49, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete and redirect to London as London's ancient Roman name. 132.205.44.134 00:35, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Don't delete - Plenty of references and reviews available to add to the article. Also, to the user wanting to redirect to London.. Londinium was the ancient name, not Londinivm. 85.211.88.254
  • The game is listed as a free browser game in the Wikipedia, here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_browser_games —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sfor (talk • contribs) 18:54, 13 May 2007 (UTC).
  • Don't delete - Londinivm has a huge following (over 20K). Dlmarti 19:08, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Don't delete - Notability is not a useful metric where few (if any) independent, reliable secondary sources on the subject exist. Londinivm is a thriving, worldwide community with tens of thousands of members, and an excellent example of a free browser-based MMORPG. This success is more than enough reason to maintain an article, especially when doing so has no ill effect on Wikipedia as a whole. Antangil 19:53, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Don't delete - It is a useful article —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.242.143.246 (talk) 20:20, 13 May 2007 (UTC).

Don't Delete - Website has huge following

  • Don't delete - Notability is merely a guideline used on Wikipedia. Yes, it is generally accepted, but it is still superceded by the cardinal rules of using common sense. With a fanbase of currently 20,418 active users, the fact that there are few independent, reliable secondary sources (perfect wording, Antagil, thanks) on the subject shouldn't be cause in itself for deletion. Gawayne 01:30, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Don't delete - Londinivm is an interesting, fun, albeit limited game. There is no reason for deletion. Wikipedia needs to end this deletion frenzy. This is an encyclopedia by the people and should reflect whatever they want to add to it. This is becoming another example of a site that grows too big and loses care for every little part. An exception must be made when there is little information to back it up. Conciseness must be valued.--Metallurgist 01:42, 14 May 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.