Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Promisance

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. —Quarl (talk) 2007-02-19 11:29Z

[edit] Promisance

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

Looks to be a webgame with no reliable secondary sources for verification. Doesn't appear to meet WP:WEB. Google returns no reliable sources. Wafulz 02:24, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Promisance is an open sourced web game with many different branches. It is a notable project that has been going on since 1999 which was based off the concepts of Earth 2025. The article may need clean up and a total revision but it does not deserve to be thrown away. What do you mean by reliable srouces? --69.22.3.213 04:26, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
    • I mean stuff described at WP:RS. Namely, non-trivial sources that have had to go through an editorial process. --Wafulz 04:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I will contact game administrators and source code developers to source this article better.--C4smok 05:28, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Looks like an advertisement and a list of links. Fundamental Dan 16:57, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete; not third party sources given. Using game admins and devs would also be a conflict of interest, by the way. Veinor (talk to me) 05:14, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I'd just like to say I'd be really disapointed if this article is deleted. I heard of promisance through some other sites but I absolutely no knowledge of it. This article helped me out a lot, and it would be a shame to remove a useful resource.

What is with the wave of people trying to delete articles. I've noticed this many times before. Is wikipedia really that low on database resources? This deleting craze is getting out of hand. I believe people have lost the sight of the original intentions of the deletion system, I believe this delete request to be unwarranted. Does this article need to be cleaned up? Yes, definitely. Should it be removed? No. 71.10.6.16 22:28, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

This isn't in regards to the database or available resources- articles are reflected in the availability of reliable sources. If multiple such sources can't be found, then a subject can't have an article. --Wafulz 18:59, 16 February 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.