Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reich Star

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 no consensus. W.marsh 18:50, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reich Star

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

This rule book for a role playing game fails has no reliable secondary sources to demonstrate notability. --Gavin Collins 12:13, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletions. --Gavin Collins 12:13, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Does not pass the notability guidelines. When it gets an article in a newspaper/website, then bring it back here. NF24^{(radio me!}_{Editor review)} 15:51, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete This article is not notable. It is also filled with some speculation and is missing references. Icestorm815 20:12, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
• Comment: That's right, we must delete or merge this trivial article that's only useful to a few thousand people in order to save electrons. Remember, save those electrons, they're more important than you think —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.139.148.100 (talk) 18:29, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Lack of source is grounds for improvement, not deletion. Edward321 04:57, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Keep Two comments first. One, this article is about the Role Playing Game Reich Star, and not just a "rule book for a role playing game". Secondly, I remember a number of articles about this when it came out in 1991, but due to it's age, you probably aren't going to find much about it online. That is the problem with dealing with older products that may have notability, but due to their age, its hard to find the outside info today. That said, I say a weak keep, keeping the notability tag for now, in hopes that somebody still has some of the old gaming magazines and such to check. Perhaps if nothing is added in several weeks, a new AfD might be appropriate.--Donovan Ravenhull 14:49, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I see that the notability tag is old (September), but I'm not quite ready to trash this yet.--Donovan Ravenhull 14:50, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

• Keep - As an element of the history of the roleplaying game genre which was 15 or so years old at the time, and a game which is covered by the RPG Encyclopedia (an interesting question... if a genre encyclopedia covers it, is it notable?) -Harmil 23:05, 10 November 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.