Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Universal

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 The Universal (song). Srikeit 01:40, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Universal

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

Delete - No assertion of notability, no reliable secondary sources to verify any assertion, tried looking for some and couldn't find any, so I'm nominating for deletion. DarkSaber2k 20:02, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

NOTE: This AfD has been linked to from the games offical forum here. DarkSaber2k 16:37, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. DarkSaber2k 20:04, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete current contents. The Universal (song) belongs here. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 00:54, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete; no independent references (WP:V), no claim of notability (WP:N) Marasmusine 15:21, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
• KEEP Is a Offical Game recongized by http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/universalcombatonline/index.html and others. Midnight 21:09, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

  Comment No, that link is for a game called "Universal Combat Online", made by a company called 3000AD. Marasmusine 08:31, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

• KEEP. Are these sources any useful?[1]

[2] [3] [4] [5]VDZ 21:35, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

• I'll address these one by one:

  [1] - softpedia.com - directory listing and download site (trivial) with user-submitted review (not reliable)

  [2] - gamesdex.com - user-submitted directory listing (trivial, not reliable)

  [3] - betawatcher.com - directory listing (trivial)

  [4] - 3dgamers.com - directory listing (trivial)

  [5] - demonews.com - directory listing (trivial)

  So, not useful I'm afraid. Marasmusine 08:31, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I second this. It's just the usual collection of link sites we always get presented with as 'evidence of 'notability'' when one of these article is up for deletion. They are exactly what I found when I tried to look for sources before nominating the article for deletion, and it is because I could only find pages like those that I nominated the article for deletion.DarkSaber2k 08:59, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

• Comment. I am not going to participate in this AfD one way or the other, but I did remove the Keep from User:Vikingzaroba as it did not present any reasoning, but rather was just a personal attack on 2 of the above editors. -Cquan (don't yell at me...) 00:18, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

  As for Vikingzaroba's removed comments, well, looking at his user page, I'd say there's a clear conflict of interest and I'd ask him to read WP:N and WP:V (the reasons why it is being AfD'd) and WP:COI. And WP:CIVIL. Marasmusine 08:36, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

KEEP: I would like to note that due to the relatively small nature of the game community, and the generally unknown nature of the game, that there aren't any third party sources for a very good reason. It's not big enough for most review sites, or anybody who doesn't play, to really care about. Thus the only people who would make reference material for the game are by necessity players of it. I feel this should be taken into consideration. 24.138.20.223 15:19, 25 May 2007 (UTC) Keira47 on The Universal forums. — 24.138.20.223 (talk • contribs) has made no other edits outside this topic.

Mmmm, fresh meat! And by the way, if the game really is not big enough for most review sites, or anybody who doesn't play, to really care about. then it shouldn't have an article here. We have WP:NOTE inclusion criteria, and a verifiability through reliable sources policy for a reason. DarkSaber2k 15:24, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

• Delete A search of "The Universal, -Wikipedia, +game" on a search engine reveals little content about the games. The only ones I can find are "directory" sites which hold a database of most games that are made anyways. Since it hasn't been mentioned by any reliable sources, I'd say it's not notable.--Kylohk 16:30, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
  • One more thing, popularity cannot be used to assert notability. Even when something is very popular within a community, it might not be noticeable in the world if no 3rd party sources mention it.--Kylohk 17:45, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - Lacking in third party non-trivial coverage. Wickethewok 03:34, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
• keep. first of all cquan, i only said that they should read the pages and goto the site instead of making judgements on stuff they know nothing about. it is complete bs that you people who know nothing of the game are gonna sit here and try to dictate wether or not it can be here. also, you are not an admin or anything, so don't act like one by deleting others comments in order to get your way. there are MANY internet games on this thing, many pages that have much less info. do these harm any of you in any way? if not, then why are you going out of your way to delete this one? it seems to me more like you guys just want this entry deleted fo the hell of it. either that yor you just had a bad experience in the game and instead of solving the problem on the forum or accepting punishment for rule breaking, your just taking your anger out here. Vikingzaroba 16:14, 26 May 2007 (UTC) — Vikingzaroba (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • If there are many internet games on Wikipedia that are not notable, it would be a matter of time before they are found and nominated for AfD too. The nomination was made in good faith, it's likely many of the posters above have not even touched the game. Also, if not many people know much about the game, it's not the responsibility of Wikipedia to make it known. It's the responsibility of independent sources like gaming review sites to make it notable, and that is required for an article to appear in Wikipedia.--Kylohk 16:22, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
    • even if that is tryue, instead of deleting it, its better to fix it. the game is on many gaming websites, you just have to search for them instead of assuming it isen't on any. you guys are also assuming it isen't well known just because you haven't heard of it. just because it doesn't have a high player count doesn't mean its not well known. it just means not many people stay to play it or aren't very active. hmm...13000 registered accounts on the forum, and i think well over 10000 registered accounts at any one time in the game. it would be many, many, many more, but unused accounts are automatically deleted to save on file space and bandwidth. Vikingzaroba 16:28, 26 May 2007 (UTC)— Vikingzaroba (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
      • hey look, heres a game that is absolutly nothing compaired to The Universal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_descent. it doesn't even have any links or anything else on the page, and even the games owner has pretty much abandond the game, so why don't all you guys go hassle them instead of harassing us dedicated, helpful, happy people at The Universal? Vikingzaroba 16:31, 26 May 2007 (UTC)— Vikingzaroba (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
        • Done. Any other articles that have been overlooked to recommend? DarkSaber2k 16:34, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
• You say that the game is mentioned by many gaming websites. A simple search engine check revealed little mention of it. Can you please give some specific examples of reliable sites that have mentioned it? For instance, has it been reviewed by IGN or Gamespot? Or any other notable gaming magazine?--Kylohk 16:36, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I just looked. It has only the usual user submitted reviews on Gamespot (non-reliable) and nothing on IGN. DarkSaber2k 16:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

• well, apparently most of the sites i can give would be unreliable when it comes to your standards. so it'd be a waste of time. is PC Gamer considered a reliable source to you guys? The Universal was featured in issue 143 which was released around xmas of 2004. it was also in a non-us gaming magazine in early 2006. i'll have to see if i can find its name on the forum. (p.s. this is the 4th tim i'm typing this. damn edits!) Vikingzaroba 16:48, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
  • PC Gamer is a reputed magazine in gaming. But the question is, what was said about the game? Was it a review, preview? How detailed was it? Link it if possible.--Kylohk 16:51, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
    • a year and a half before that the game had a 2 page review in the mag under its old name of A-Tractor. i'll have to see if i can find a scan of it. Vikingzaroba 16:53, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

      Is that the UK or US version of PC Gamer? Marasmusine 18:02, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

      • i believe it was in the UK version both times it was in PC Gamer. Vikingzaroba 02:54, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

• KEEP Just in case MPOGD is reliable.[[6]] [[7]] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.199.96.164 (talk • contribs).

It isn't. Directory listings are trivial sources. --TheSeer (TalkˑContribs) 04:34, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

• Delete as per DarkSaber2k. Sephylight 23:29, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

• Delete: fails WP:N and WP:V. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 01:21, 29 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.