Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Video games

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Video games. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Video games|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Video games. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from August 2015) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Video games/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Video games-related deletions

TheoTown

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

The page was deleted multiple times for A7 and G11 reasons, so I figure having a full deletion discussion might be worth it. The only sources given are primary: the game's website, and the Steam/App Store/Google Play pages and ratings. The only sources I could find were a self-published blog explicitly including affiliate links, and this review, whose website appears to have an editorial team but for which I'm not sure how reliable it is, as only one of the members is an accredited journalist. Still, assuming this counts as a RS, a single source isn't enough for WP:GNG. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:22, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:22, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Agree with what's explained above, there isn't much in the way of product reviews for this app. I don't find much else either. Oaktree b (talk) 19:54, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: per nom
Mithilanchalputra (Talk) 11:37, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete This is much more borderline - a search on my end found two RS reviews: one from TouchArcade [1] another from 148Apps [2] and a non-RS listicle from GamingEsports [3] and brief mention in Wireframe [4]. I would consider this to be notable if one more RS or solid review could be located. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 08:39, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot! Just curious, where did you do your WP:BEFORE? I only did a cursory search (first pages of Google and Google News), but I'm curious if there are better places to look for video game-related sources. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:28, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Little information I have found that can demonstrate notability.--Bexaendos (talk) 16:37, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the article will be deleted since there will be no information about the game, I propose to publish more information. 2800:810:544:AF:8DC6:DFBF:DB1A:7522 (talk) 17:51, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean? You can ask sources to publish more information, although it might take longer than the time this AfD runs, but we can't add more information that sources haven't published. Although the sources provided above can definitely be added in the article, and are a good first step. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:26, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redout (video game)

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

No matter how much work I do on this page, it will never fix the issue of there being no sources for it. Because of Wikipedia's original research and fancruft policies, I can't do anything else with this page. It simply just fails the notability requirements. Before I made my edits to it (which could honestly be considered fancruft because no one needed to know about the intricate details of all nine gamemodes), it was honestly one of the more pathetic stubs on Wikipedia. I love this game and it hurts a bit to say this, but the page just has to go. It isn't going to get any better, no one is going to do any more reporting on it. The game is dead, I've never seen more than six concurrent players on SteamCharts and online mode is a barren wasteland. Unless you guys want to keep this forever-incomplete article, then it has to go unless one of you guys can do your magic and find like 15 good sources on the gameplay, development, and reception of the game. ApteryxRainWing🐉 | Roar with me!!! | My contributions 12:43, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Just because a video game is not popular is not grounds for deletion. David notMD (talk) 13:07, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@David notMD but can we really leave it like it is? I've done a lot of digging and I can't really find any good sources for anything (if Steam and Reddit threads were acceptable sources, we'd be good but no big outlets are reporting on Redout). My edits were obvious fancruft and they make up like 50% of the article now. I kind of get where you're coming from with the popularity thing, but I think the popularity is a somewhat decent indicator when it comes to sourcing. If you were a reporter for a big game journalism site, would you report on that one weird niche racing game with six people playing it that came out 8 years ago, or would you report on the big new AAA game that just came out? I highly doubt we will get any new sources to work with, and the ones we have can make a stub article at best. I think it just has to go. It wasn't a good article when I found it, and my edits didn't make it any better, no matter how hard I tried. ApteryxRainWing🐉 | Roar with me!!! | My contributions 13:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
David is right, popularity is also not an argument for deletion or preservation, it is also an indicator. Fan content is also not an argument for deletion because it can be corrected, I have seen the sources, they are not the best but I find that it is enough to prove admissibility, no need for a game to be in a major newspaper like The New York Times. The game was developed by an Italian company so maybe there are sources that you have not found because it would be in a foreign language. SparklingBlueMoon (talk) 15:04, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The current article is viewed over 1,000 times per month on average (Page view stats). I am not sure if that weighs on the deletion discussion directly.--Gronk Oz (talk) 14:22, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Gronk Oz Do you think these visitors might be those who accidentally ended up here while looking for the medical phenomena of the same name? ApteryxRainWing🐉 | Roar with me!!! | My contributions 14:42, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Whether a page is viewed a lot or not can be an indication, but it is not an argument for keeping or deleting it. SparklingBlueMoon (talk) 14:45, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SparklingBlueMoon agreed, people fall down Wikipedia rabbit holes all the time, and it doesn't record how long the visitors were on the page, so maybe these visitors were people just hopping around via inline links without actually reading or learning anything from the article. ApteryxRainWing🐉 | Roar with me!!! | My contributions 14:47, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Motorsport, and Italy. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 12:56, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The game appears on Nintendo Life, Push Square, Eurogamer... we can do better in sources but after seeing the sources in the article it seems to me sufficient for this page to be eligible on Wikipedia. SparklingBlueMoon (talk) 14:55, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SparklingBlueMoon do they provide the information I need, though? I am looking for reception, development, and more detailed gameplay information. If it's just a generic announcement like "hey this game came out made by this group of adrenaline junkie Italians" then it isn't what I am looking for in a source. ApteryxRainWing🐉 | Roar with me!!! | My contributions 15:07, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Something is potentially eligible if it is covered by several independent and reliable sources, which is the case here. I understand what you are saying and I agree that there is some information missing but it is not because there is not much information that the article is not eligible, otherwise the stubs would not exist and would all be deleted. SparklingBlueMoon (talk) 15:29, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feels like a Keep to me too. Eurogamer had Redout is the next-gen WipEout you've been waiting for (2016) and Redout on Xbox One X falls short of the PS4 Pro experience (2018), both of which are pretty in-depth and show sustained coverage. I remember it was also reviewed in some detail on one of their YouTube channels - Outside Xbox maybe? Adam Sampson (talk) 21:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I initially assumed this was some sort of trolling, as Redout got a massive amount of reviews given a simple glance at the Metacritic page. More than half of them there are from reliable sources and easily enough to merit an article. The state of an article has nothing to do with notability, per WP:SURMOUNTABLE and WP:NEXIST. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:16, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I promise I'm not trolling or anything, I just couldn't find any good sources on things like the gameplay and development history and I hate keeping a stub article around that couldn't be improved in the ways I wanted ApteryxRainWing🐉 | Roar with me!!! | My contributions 17:58, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For future reference you should check MobyGames and Metacritic first before assuming a game has no sources. Generally speaking, reviews that are WP:SIGCOV will give you enough to fully source the game's gameplay. The custom search engine linked here also helps, as does searching Google for "<Game name here> review". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:13, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Two reviews as a significant coverage are already present in the article, but Metacritic alone shows tons of sources available: [5] [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17]. If we start including sources with wiki articles outside of EN that are likely to be reliable (Gamer.no, Everyeye, JeuxActu), it's even more. Easily passes WP:GNG. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 10:00, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above. Passes WP:GNG with flying colours; definitely enough to warrant keeping this article. Just because the game is dead doesn't mean it doesn't deserve coverage: see WP:NTEMP. Beachweak (talk) 11:56, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per others, but also kudos to Jovanmilic97 on collecting all those sources to which, yes, this article passes GNG. Conyo14 (talk) 18:55, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. Whatever misunderstanding may have led to this AFD, sources have clearly been found. This passes WP:SIGCOV. Shooterwalker (talk) 06:18, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Old Grandma Hardcore

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

No real establishment of notability. The sources provided are: a blog site, the MTV homepage, a BusinessWeek article about her gaming career which seemed quite trivial, and a forum post-esque story pointing back to the aforementioned blog site. Been notability tagged since 2012. I should also add, I suggest not looking up her nickname lest you find links to 'the Hub'. Aydo h8^[contribs] 10:36, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Video games, and United States of America. Aydo h8^[contribs] 10:36, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Internet, and Ohio. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:37, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Some coverage in Fox and CBS News [18], [19], Endgadget [20]... The name does bring up porn links, but we can still find some things about this granny. Oaktree b (talk) 20:01, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I am not convinced there is enough WP:SIGCOV for her to pass WP:NPERSON. There is an article on Igromania, but mostly an interview (primary source). Otherwise, she is largely mentioned in short anecdotes. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:56, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep With the additional sources found by Jovanmilic97, I change my !vote to a keep. It's clear that NPERSON is passed at this point. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:44, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Significant coverage in NBC News [21], Der Spiegel [22], The Columbus Dispatch [23], The Spokesman-Review [24], cz:Aktuálně.cz [25], has some brief commentary in The Village Voice [26]. Meets WP:GNG/WP:NBIO. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 11:33, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CarX Street

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

Non-notable per general notability. A quick look using the search engine finds no additional significant coverage beyond the already cited Multiplayer.it review and a briefly descriptive GRY entry. There just isn't enough here to establish a notable article. Was going to draftify but it looks like a draft already exists. Also thought about a merge but it looks like no other CarX titles or the franchise itself has an article. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 07:24, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 07:24, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not a notable game. The creator should be on notice that advertising is not allowed on Wikipedia and multiple reliable sources are required for an article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
what do you mean "advertising"? i have no connection with CarX... DB554 (talk) 11:37, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - non-notable game of a non-notable series. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 13:40, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A review of Russian sources on ruwiki please. Playground.ru has a list of the series with articles. IgelRM (talk) 20:18, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can take a closer look, but a brief skim of the page indicates there's no reception section or reviews of the game. One source that appears to do so is just conveying quotes from Steam user reactions which is just a secondary form of WP:USERG. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 21:09, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Found a mention in a PwC report, a NintendoWorldReport review of CarX Highway Racing and racinggames.gg (Gfinity) review. IgelRM (talk) 23:35, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Doesn't appear to have sources that meet the standard for WP:SIGCOV. Shooterwalker (talk) 00:32, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WePlay AniMajor

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

Fails WP:NEVENT; no "enduring historical significance". Janhrach (talk) 17:09, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Events. Janhrach (talk) 17:09, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:32, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

İstanbul Efsaneleri: Lale Savaşçıları

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

Was actually gonna do this some time ago. Anyway, this article has no sources (and been like that for a few years) and looking for possible source and there doesn't seem to be anything prove this article can still be rewritten and kept. Their official website seems to have been taken down, or perhaps never existed in the first place. The subject alone is likely non-notable, if not as much as Battle for Dream Island always tended to be. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 01:11, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 01:11, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:09, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per significant coverage in these sources: ^[1]^[2]^[3]. Also, 10 seconds on Wayback Machine yields dozens of snapshots of the official website listed in the external links section, so it's a poor WP:BEFORE by the nominator. Merko (talk) 00:12, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zero Hour (video game)

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

Found reviews in The Games Machine and Softonic, and a news mention in PCGamesN. While this isn't terrible it also isn't enough to pass WP:GNG because PCGamesN doesn't really offer up any critical opinions, and everything else is an unreliable source. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. While I think a soft deletion would work in this instance in case the game becomes super popular (it was released only three months ago), the article does not really have significant coverage aside from The Games Machine article. The Softonic article I would also consider more unreliable as it appears user-generated and may not be independent with a download link. Conyo14 (talk) 18:17, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, this is not a game for an international audience. It's targeted at local Bangladeshis, & it's quite popular here. That is why you will find numerous evaluations in Bangla newspapers. You can also read Sportskeeda's review and IGN's article, "Old-School Rainbow Six Spiritual Successor 'Zero Hour' Drops Launch Trailer" Prantoo Biswas (talk) 18:24, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sportskeeda is not reliable: WP:SPORTSKEEDA. Conyo14 (talk) 18:50, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment A source search should be conducted in Bengali per Prantoo Biswas to see if anything can be turned up. I'd do it myself, but I admittedly don't know the first thing about what Bengali sources are reliable, so I'll leave it in the hands of a more experienced editors. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 21:32, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:47, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It has notable sources attached to it. This0k (talk) 22:53, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which ones? Conyo14 (talk) 23:57, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

VoxelStorm

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

Fails WP:NCORP, no significant coverage of the company itself. Mika1h (talk) 12:12, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, United Kingdom, and England. Mika1h (talk) 12:12, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or redirect to AdvertCity. Company lacks in notability in general but game's article is much more well documented and written, so the latter will do unless the game's article is deleted, MimirIsSmart (talk) 15:38, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:15, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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 no consensus‎. ✗plicit 11:53, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gilman Louie

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

non-notable person who created an article about themselves. 1keyhole (talk) 05:59, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep The article has been expanded since creation, and Gilmanl's current authorship is around 3%, so I'm not too concerned there. Notability is the bigger concern. The coverage in The Christian Science Monitor is significant, reliable (see WP:CSMONITOR), secondary, and independent. Finding a second source is harder. Most other sources the article cites are not independent, unless the government [27] counts as independent. A Vox article [28] I found may have significant enough coverage, or it may not. More than one sentence addresses Louie directly. Regardless, being on the Foreign Affairs Policy Board might mean WP:NPOL applies. I'm at a weak keep for now. PrinceTortoise (he/him) ^{(poke • inspect)} 07:25, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Video games, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:54, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:15, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep: This is from an old magazine [29], with the Christian Science Monitor, should have enough. Oaktree b (talk) 16:33, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Not sure if this is the same person [30], was involved in Tetris coming to popularity. Oaktree b (talk) 16:35, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 09:32, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Well I just saw a page about this guy in a Time magazine from 1989 (San Francisco October 17). It was in an ad by Commodore for the Amiga machine. Curious how this possibly influences this discussion. (I have pictures but am not sure of the recommended way to add them here. I don't have so much experience with this. Anyone curious to see them could give me pointers.) Tamedu quaternion (talk) 05:29, 9 December 2024 (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.

Yoshimitsu

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

The reception section is a mess of listicles and "anything not nailed down" types of articles. While there can be some degree of commentary gleamed for Yoshimitsu, it's brief and often repetitive. Even checking sources I've used in the past for Soulcalibur characters doesn't offer much at all. There's just no meat on this bone that I can find. Kung Fu Man (talk) 05:13, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games. Kung Fu Man (talk) 05:13, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Honestly, I'm leaning forward to being neutral in this situation. I feel like there's a chance the character might be notable since they have been involved in two fighting game franchises and have almost appeared in every main game of each franchise and gone through multiple distinct designs. Otherwise, the best source I could find about Yoshimitsu is [31]. These sources might also help [32], [33], [34], [35], and [36]. Aside from that, this character has three incarnations throughout the Tekken and Soulcalibur franchises, so if the character information is going to be merged, then the Tekken version of Yoshimitsu should be merged in Characters of the Tekken series, and the Soulcalibur version of Yoshimitsu should be merged in Characters of the Soulcalibur series. Kazama16 (talk) 07:32, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Den of Geek one is the strongest source coupled with Jasper's commentary on the Tekken character ranking list. The main problem though is that the Game Rant and CGMag refs are echoes of some of the commentary from that one on the designs and could be summed up as "his appearance changes frequently", PushSquare is basically death battle commentary in this case, and The Gamer and 3DPrint refs are both about fan works (I checked to see if the designer on the latter had some notability that could help but no dice). I feel there may not be enough actually said for SIGCOV when the sources are lined up is my concern.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 08:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect Just not notable. The WP:GNG is clearly failed here. If this page is redirected, it should be moved and the DAB made primary. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:30, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per others. Very little SIGCOV and a very clear-cut case of not much notability existing for him. I'd redirect Yoshimitsu (Soulcalibur) and Yoshimitsu (Tekken) to their respective character lists, since he's a character of two different franchises, and redirect Yoshimitsu (No distinction) to the DAB page to be the primary topic, per Zx. Both lists just redirect to his article, so content will need to be merged to them for the information to be retained. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:48, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Per Kazama16's sources. Den of Geek (both of them) and CGmagonline are the strongest sources. Those two, plus GamesRadar and Bloody Disgusting and Game Rant, which all discuss his design and unorthodox fighting style, compared to other fighting game characters, may also be of some help. The more trivial sources can definitely be trimmed down, but overall, I feel this isn't redirect-worthy. I can see this being a Voldo type of situation, where most of the notability comes from his "freakish" design and unorthodox fighting style. MoonJet (talk) 22:32, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Isolated, the Bloody Disgusting source would be good...but it's just saying the same thing as the CMag and previous Game Rant sources. Much like there's only so many times you can say "this character is sexy" in an article, "this character is freaky" starts to get repetitive fast.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 22:45, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:25, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per others. This is borderline, but merge is a good WP:ATD that will WP:PRESERVE this in case better sources come along later. Shooterwalker (talk) 03:56, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 09:29, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per others. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 12:19, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Redirects

^ Danacı, Beril Özge (2022-08-08). "Türk Oyun Sektörünün İlklerinden - Şeyh Cehalet'le Savaştığımız Oyun İstanbul Efsaneleri: Lale Savaşçıları". Onedio (in Turkish). Retrieved 2024-12-07.
^ Kocagöz, Yigilante (2014-08-22). "Lale Savaşçıları - Irospalar, Yobazlar ve 90'ların "Karanlık" Tanımı [Oyunlarda Türk Temsili - FauxPlayDosya] - Geekyapar!". Geekyapar (in Turkish). Retrieved 2024-12-07.
^ Hürmen, Tuana Seda (2023-05-06). "Nostalji Günlüğü: İstanbul Efsaneleri: Lale Savaşçıları". Oyun Günlüğü (in Turkish). Retrieved 2024-12-07.

[1] Danacı, Beril Özge (2022-08-08). "Türk Oyun Sektörünün İlklerinden - Şeyh Cehalet'le Savaştığımız Oyun İstanbul Efsaneleri: Lale Savaşçıları". Onedio (in Turkish). Retrieved 2024-12-07.

[2] Kocagöz, Yigilante (2014-08-22). "Lale Savaşçıları - Irospalar, Yobazlar ve 90'ların "Karanlık" Tanımı [Oyunlarda Türk Temsili - FauxPlayDosya] - Geekyapar!". Geekyapar (in Turkish). Retrieved 2024-12-07.

[3] Hürmen, Tuana Seda (2023-05-06). "Nostalji Günlüğü: İstanbul Efsaneleri: Lale Savaşçıları". Oyun Günlüğü (in Turkish). Retrieved 2024-12-07.

[1]

[2]

[3]