Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Theme park builder 3d

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, even discounting my Delete entry below. NawlinWiki 20:28, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Theme park builder 3d

ATTENTION! If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus among Wikipedia editors on whether a page is suitable for this encyclopedia. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. Nonetheless, you are welcome to participate and express your opinions. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments by suspected single-purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username}}

Theme park builder 3d (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Not notable no references Dureo 04:33, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

• 'Don't Delete Well I might be part of the project I strongly fell that it deserves to have an entry. This game is not just an idea that a few people came up with and decided lets see I we can pull this off but has actually been extremely thought out and by people in the know including professional programmers how will be working on the project. This game is going to happen and is going to be deserving of a page here wether now or latter. I also fell we deserve to have this page because we are working to produce a free, open source game with no strings attached that every one can enjoy, which is similar to what this site is based on providing a resource for people to use and change free of charge. So I fell that if you say that our project is not deserving of a page then you really don't want to support the same belief of free resources which is what has made this site what it is today. In a world of mass companies and corporate politics its up to the creators of these free projects to stick together and help each other to show others that there are people left how actually care abut there product and not just the moony there making off of it. Heck the whole inspiration for this game which now started over a year ago was because of fans of a certain park building game that were feed up with the lack of support and cooperate politics that was making the game that they invested in (by buying) left in sate of much need improvement and decided sense we cant fix the game our self lets just make something by our selves that will have everything we ever wanted in a theme park simulation game. Coaster sim. fan
• Delete per nom plus the fact that the game does not seem to have been released yet. Also, the people behind this game seem to be aware of the article [1], most likely because the person who created it is also involved in the project, so be prepared for off-wiki canvassing of keep !votes. MartinDK 06:11, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete non-notable. --Fredrick day 12:45, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. --Jacques Pirat ^Talk 16:14, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
• Don't Delete It's a big game in progress and it deserves a wikipedia article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.164.48.112 (talk • contribs) — 216.164.48.112 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
• Don't Delete The game has existing coding and models for rides and scenery. Many coders and modelers are participating and the game is in its 5th Game Design Document revision. A check of the existing TPB3D forums will show that the project is moving along at a fast rate. It was noted at the start that this largest project in the history of Open Source Software would be on a two to three year schedule, but too much already exists. I urge you to check out the http://www.tpb3d.net forums and see the actual progress that exists. -- Slickdude 9:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
• Don't Delete This game is community project that deserves the right to a wiki article. This project is non profit and is beginning to grow at a rapid rate, this community based project has been recognized by so many of the gaming community and should also be recognised for it here. If you check the TPB3D forums you will notice that it is not just a mere idea, rides are being created and many other objects are being made as we speak. The coding is starting to go together. This is simply not a day out of people attempting to do the impossible, this is happening and happening now. -- User: surfingoz 2:10, 5 July 2007 (NSW)

this is not a vote - the only arguments for keep being made are 1) it exists (which we know and nobody doubts) and 2) it will be important in the future - neither of those are valid policy reasons for keeping. The only way the article will be kept is if multiple independent sources are found that demonstrate that it is notable. So getting people from the forum to come over and repeat the same ILIKEIT arguments is a waste of everyone's time --Fredrick day 06:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

• This is a response of common sense - Wikipedia is an everything knowledge encyclopedia mixture. The purpose of wikipedia is to have information on significant things and even less significant things. This is a major significance. Sir, if you remove knowledge and information are you not defeating the very reason for wikipedias existence which is information and knowledge? I think that "The largest project in sourceforge" history is quite significant. As for insulting other's participation, they participated because common sense has been substituted for communism sense. Wikipedia lives or dies by its growth and this is a part of history that is being made. When you say notable sources you refer to a college institution or a gaming magazine I presume or perhaps the President of the United States all of which could be notable and independent. Some one's aun't could be considered notable, could they not and they could be independent too. Your comments do not hold water, in fact judging Frederick Day by your comments, a wiki could be destroyed on the most ludicrous of reasons couldn't it. But the end result is the destruction of significant information and a tiny piece of the wiki not being there. So again if you want to destroy the wikipedia community this is a first step...I am always amused and surprised at how many people do the worst things to themselves Slickdude 11:22, 4 July 2007

• You deleter's win. I just deleted my original wiki topic. In fact it would be best to remove this valuable information from the community. I don't think you or this community are worthy of such information as this. We will install our own software and boost it in the search engines, but I honestly am going to give you guys exactly what you want, and the best thing about my decision is that the TPB3D community wins and wins big, because they are a much larger group of people. The truth is that this has been deleted and marked over and over again and harassment after harassment and for who? Your amusement. Heck, we have high enough search engine rankings by just the forums and I can quickly get a separate wikipedia software going and rapidly get it searched in high rankings without your folks pompass attitudes and harassment over some important information. We don't lose, but your community does, because now they do not have the information anymore. So now its easy enough. Go ahead and delete my original topic from your system and get it over with, cause the TPB3D community will have the very last laugh. Slickdude 11:37, 4 July 2007
  • Okey-dokey. If it ever meets the Wikipedia standards for notability, I'm sure someone outside of the project will create a new article, and that one won't be deleted. Propaniac 12:17, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - non-notable. I don't see any references to this project anywhere of any substance that would justify leaving it. Also, I'd classify the article as spam since it seems to be nothing more than an advertising pitch for the project. Drachemorder 19:44, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

• Actually I will ask the TPB3D community personally to forego putting TPB3D in here. We already got our own wikipedia going and it will be bumped up in the search engines too, se we don't need people acting like morons because they have nothing great in their lives and like to laud power over others. Yeah you may have rules, but like district Judge in the United States once said, if we enforced every rule on the books, people wouldn't be able to live anymore. That is what is happening here. You have attacked this project from one end of the spectrum to the other. Have you ever considered that wiki is about knowledge and that by removing knowledge especially when it is significant it goes against what this was intended for. A bunch of people have made up so many rules that those very rules negate and trample the very purpose of what the wiki is supposed to be. In an ironic sense, I can see why the wiki idea in the long run will be doomed because your rules being so tightly enforced will be what consumes your project. Sad, very sad.

As far as TPB3D goes, I would prefer it be deleted as I originally established it and I also don't want it in here either anymore. Not to benefit an evil community that runs on ego rather than common sense, using rule after rule to attack great things. TPB3D has grown well beyond the significance you all require in here, but some of you are so jealous of a project like this that you don't realize what is being created. Stick with a dying product of Roller Coaster Tycoon 3 rather than a community created and will be permanently ongoing project such as TPB3D. This community doesn't need you guys either. There, now if this doesn't get you to kill tpb3d as a wiki in here and remove significant information, I don't know what will. Slickdude 13:53, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Never heard of Roller Coaster Tycoon, guess it's a video game - I doubt anyone here cares about that product. You seem to be taking this as some personal slight. What you have to understand is that this is not about the product, it's about the lack of sources. It's not about what this will happen in the future with this product, it's about the lack of sources. Nobody is saying you are not working hard on your product, nobody is saying that your product shouldn't exist. What we are saying is that wikipedia has certain fundemental policies that we try and apply equally to all articles - at the present moment, your article does not meet those standards - that's it. This has nothing to do with ego, nothing to do with being jealous - it's about applying our policies consistently. Your personal attacks are a waste of time, we don't delete articles because someone makes some snide remarks. If someone provides some sources for the article that are notable - this AFD is over - it's that simple. --Fredrick day 20:58, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, no independent sources establishing notability. Original author tried to blank the article (presumably per comments above), but is not the only significant editor of the article, so we can't speedily delete under category g7. NawlinWiki 21:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. In the name of giving this article as fair of a shot as we possibly can, I have spent the last couple days searching through articles for any legitimate sources of notability. There are a little more than 2500 google hits, of which less than 50 are truly unique. I've searched through all of those fifty as well as every post on the project's web forum looking for something to pass WP:N. I'm confident in saying that there is nothing. My position is that this article should be deleted for failing WP:N, WP:NOR, and WP:COI. -Trusilver 21:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 12:05, 7 July 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.