Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sea3d

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, no assertion of notability in the article, and no sources provided either on this page or in the article make this a easy decision. Future rewrites (if any) must go beyond the "This is a version of <game>. It was written by <name>. It can be played on <platforms>. <external link>" boilerplate description, which is all this article consisted of. —Resurgent insurgent 2007-04-17 14:02Z

[edit] Sea3d

Sea3d (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

non-notable unlicensed computer implementation of a notable board game JHunterJ 11:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. No third-party coverage. Abeg92contribs 14:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. I don't think Sea3D is trivial or non-notable. My main concern is that people who come to the Settlers of Catan wiki page can learn about all implementations of the game. I have added links to the bottom of the Settlers page under the category 'non-licensed' so that people can follow the links without the possibility of confusing licensed with non-licensed versions.--Bcnstony 21:21, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

  Where has it been noted? (WP:RS) -- JHunterJ 23:29, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

• Strong Keep Merge w/ Settlers of Catan. This game is well noted in the video gaming community as one of the first electronic adaptations of the popular "Settlers of Catan" board game. A Google search alone for "Sea3d Catan" brings up hundreds of results. The article could use clean up and expansion however. Diabloman 05:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

  Well noted where? Is one of the hundreds of Google hits a reliable source? If so, that should be added to the article. -- JHunterJ 11:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

  I will work on finding some reliable/notable sources Diabloman 13:02, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

  I have found many notable websites referencing Sea3d (Home of The Underdogs, the MobyGames forums), but on further consideration I've changed my suggestion to a merge with the article on Settlers of Catan; I'm not convinced an article just on Sea3d could be more than a stub.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Diabloman (talk • contribs) 05:49, 12 April 2007 (UTC).

  As an unlicensed derivative work, it really shouldn't be merged into the Settlers of Catan page, IMO. -- JHunterJ 10:58, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

  It appears your concern with this page is that it is unlicensed. How is this different from the XBOX version of Settlers of Catan? Other than a different name, the games are identical. Are you suggesting that this is a moral issue?--Bcnstony 03:35, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

  No. My concern with this article is its notability. My concern with the new proposal that it be merged into Settlers of Catan is that it is not a Settlers of Catan game (for legal reasons, in this case), and therefore not topical for the Settlers of Catan article either. -- JHunterJ 03:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 06:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

• Merge and redirect to board game article. —Ocatecir ^Talk 07:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, no reason to merge an non notable online version of the game to the main page for it. Fram 10:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, and strong don't merge - articles should stay on topic, and not start listing unofficial computer implementations that someone happens to have written. Percy Snoodle 11:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Merge if its existence is relevant from the perspective of the Settlers of Catan game, but if it'd just be a link to a download, it seems likely to fail WP:NOT#LINK.--McGeddon 12:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete I suppose I should put my formal vote here as well. -- JHunterJ 13:42, 17 April 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.