Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Poing (video game)

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:46, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Poing (video game)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not appear to have any reliable sources in existence indicating notability. flowing dreams (talk page) 12:07, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. flowing dreams (talk page) 12:07, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A clear failure of WP:GNG, as there are no multiple significant reliable and independent sources that cover the subject. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 12:51, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I see the page was nominated for PROD by Dgpop and then endorsed by Izno. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 12:53, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I removed the above mentioned prod on procedural grounds (previous prod in 2009), no opinion on notability. There probably is not much more RS coverage than mentioned in the article: I also found 1/3 page in the (Italian) Amiga Magazine (volume 5, issue 38, October 1992, p. 79; featured on their coverdisk) and similar or shorter articles in other Amiga magazines (eg. Amiga Format, issue 112, July 1998, p. 97; again on their coverdisk). Pavlor (talk) 16:23, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete contains only one reference to one page in a book. The lack of references fails to establish any notablility; clearly fails WP:GNG. Spy-cicle (talk) 16:41, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above, fails WP:GNG. Videogameplayer99 (talk) 18:23, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete Contains only one reference and does not establish enough notability to warrant its own article. Fails WP:GNG Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 12:35, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note you already "voted" delete 4 days ago... Pavlor (talk) 13:26, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavlor: Oh I must not have realised, thanks for letting me know, I will get rid of my second vote. Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 22:37, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.