Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Universal Videogame List

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 of the debate was Delete. enochlau (talk) 00:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Universal Videogame List

Non-notable website, sort of an ad but more of a speech. but Alexa rank is about 560,000. Delete. CastAStone 00:10, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

  • The site is older than similar sites listed here (Klov, MobyGames) and the content is wider. No reason to delete (User:Kamehamehaaa)
  • Delete pn! - FrancisTyers 01:16, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nominator. — JIP | Talk 09:47, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as non-notable website. —Quarl (talk) 2006-01-02 10:30Z
  • Keep --Chazz88 12:29, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Tim Pierce 13:55, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom.  RasputinAXP  talk contribs 14:06, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, per nom. Ajwebb 22:26, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete. Sorry, but not notable enough. The information available at KLOV, MobyGames & GameFAQs already trump this site. It doesn't matter how old the site is if it's a poorly developed concept. The size/scope of its list of games is duly noted, but the coverage of said games is nothing but flimsy and unsubstantial. Searching for Super Mario Bros. on the NES, just look at the spareness of the information in the resulting games. All 5 of those games barely have any information, and Super Mario Bros. 1, 2 & 3 are arguably the most popular games listed in the database. No reason in my mind to keep this article as "notable". - Liontamer 22:49, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per Liontamer. You can call me Al 14:06, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete spam. Incognito 05:44, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per Quarl. Stifle 15:35, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Clean up, remove POV, then Keep per Kamehamehaaa. Notability is not based on the quality of a website, but on how well-known or important it is. It would seem that this site is far more notable than many other websites that have articles (and should also be kept). -- Hinotori(talk)|(ctrb) 15:59, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • KEEP. I've cleaned, wikified, added some more info and tried to remove POV Kamehamehaaa
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.