Wiki How:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Games

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Games: board, card, etc. 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:
  1. 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.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|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 Games: board, card, etc. 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 September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch

See also Sports-related deletions and Video games-related deletions.


edit
Down-ball (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Searches for a reliable WP:RS fail. The term is absent in Google Scholar and Books, on the Web used to describe particular situation in handball and the Four square game, but never in this context. The description on the site of Melbourne University [1] appears to be a typo: the detailed rules (under "At School 05") do not describe any wall use (it seems that the previous short text is a result of a mix-up, the game with a wall is described elsewhere: "Wall ball"). The other source [2] clearly states that down ball is Four square on p. 40 Викидим (talk) 19:47, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PROD was objected to by Rockycape. See his objections on User talk:Rockycape#Proposed deletion of Down-ball. Викидим (talk) 19:56, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Викидим - I think your position would benefit by consideration of the context of schoolyard games more generally.Schoolyard games such as Down-ball are primarily passed down to new generations in the schoolyard and are generally not recorded in the literature or on the web to a large extent like main stream sports for example.To be a useful contributor to the Down-ball wikipedia page I would ask that you change your approach from being a sceptic and pushing for deletion to helping to find better references whether they be in the literature or on the web.I'll certainly be working to find better references myself. Down-ball deserves a page on wikipedia as a schoolyard game enjoyed by many school kids today. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rockycape (talkcontribs) 01:04, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch 02:37, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Four square. I find no evidence that down-ball as an independent concept refers to anything other than the popular recess game. The article uses the two sources to say the game is distinct from four square, but the University of Melbourne source makes no reference to four square and the "Play and Folklore" source (whose discussion of down-ball is based on the Melbourne source) specifically says down-ball is "also called Four-square." Additional sources indicate that this term is indeed just another name for four square; see Susemihl and Tsolidis. Dclemens1971 (talk) 11:52, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep I rebut your first assertion that down-ball as an independent concept refers to anything other than the popular recess game (Four square). I point you to the University of Melbourne source at the top of the page where it states "Downball is a game where the first player bounces the ball on ground, to rebound off (the) wall. The second player must hit ball the same way after only one bounce. Everyone must do the same until they miss - then they are out." Rockycape (talk) 10:08, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: I think that there needs to be some further looking then. As a kid of the age in Australia, downball and four square are different games. Four square needs four, and involves four squares. Down ball could have multiple participants, did require a wall, and no squares. Only commonality was a ball and people, and the required impact. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:26, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I have improved the page by updating two references (added page number to pdf ref) and adding a third reference. I have deleted the sentence referring to Four square. Rockycape (talk) 10:14, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop !voting "keep" with every comment. One is enough. You have also not addressed the sources I linked above that say that down-ball is another name for four square. Dclemens1971 (talk) 11:43, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Michael Larson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:BLP1E. Jax 0677 (talk) 23:02, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*keep BLP1E does not apply. He is not alive. And the article has substantial information about him beyond his winning strategy. JoshuaZ (talk) 01:29, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • An additional comment: Since Jax 0677 has decided in a somewhat idiosyncratic way to express skepticism about the above (see edit history of this page), I'll note that the article has a whole section titled "Later life, death, and legacy." JoshuaZ (talk) 02:17, 22 June 2024 (UTC) Changing opinion to redirect. Fourthords's comments below are convincing. JoshuaZ (talk) 16:18, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I assumed the nominator meant WP:BIO1E, which does apply. Also, all of this article's verifiable content (including the 11% not stemming from the PYL event) is already to be found at the article about the overall event—Press Your Luck scandal. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 02:53, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Crime, Games, Florida, and Ohio. WCQuidditch 02:33, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Press Your Luck scandal, if only because there's little left to merge. The history may be useful for attribution purposes, though, and keeping the history around is useful for tracking how we wrote about this subject years in the past. As for Larson's article, it's now redundant to the scandal article. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 19:26, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Notcoin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Procedural nomination per WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 11#Notcoin, as the redirect target of Telegram (software), or any other target, was not found suitable. The page had been moved to draftspace on the day of its creation, as not ready for mainspace, however the creator had rejected the draftification. Jay 💬 06:23, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kyle Cartwright (poker player) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No real indication of notability, only sources are routine 'match reports' on poker news sites and a stats database. Doesn't meet WP:NBIO. Only notable for a single event, so WP:BIO1E applies. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:05, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Khar-polis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No sources found. Zero citations for 16 years. External link is a YouTube video called "KHARPOLICE 2" purporting to show "Iranian men playing Kharpolis" at Cachuma Lake, California, in 2010. (And the only comment on the video is "CHINCHE AL AGUA" which I guess is supposed to verify that the Mexican game is the same as the Iranian game.) Either this is WP:OR or possibly even WP:HOAX. Cielquiparle (talk) 20:15, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Previous AfD in 2008 addressed only WP:NOTGUIDE accusations and did not address the lack of sourcing. –LaundryPizza03 (d) 03:38, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the only edits by the creator were to create and crosslink this article at 17:25, 29 September 2008. –LaundryPizza03 (d) 03:39, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment one can find pictures of this game online, such as at [3], so I would exclude a hoax. I assume reliable sources, if they exist, would be only available in Farsi language. Broc (talk) 15:48, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Wayward Realms (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The game has only recently launched a Kickstarter and while there seems to be a bunch of positive press about the potential of this eventual game, that does not mean that it will actually happen (a bit of WP:CRYSTAL combined with the unsure nature of Kickstarter campaigns). I'm not necessarily advocating deletion outright, but I also do not think this should have been accepted from the Draft space (new reviewer etc etc) and should be returned there until it's actually released. Primefac (talk) 18:50, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Games. Primefac (talk) 18:50, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Per WP:NEXIST. There are a lot more PCGamesN articles, GamesRadar+ and GameStar, just to name a few. It's true that the article is poorly sourced, and I agree that it should not have been accepted, but now that it's in article space, these problems are surmountable by the proper cleanup and editing. Simply being a bad article accept should not be cause for deletion, that should be on the reviewer to own up to their mistake. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 13:11, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 17:24, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Sepiol (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No real indication of notability, only sources are routine 'match reports' on poker news sites and a stats database. Doesn't meet WP:NBIO. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:21, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And again - the sources are all there backing up the main statement probably even more obvious than ever before (Las Vegas Review Journal isn't just providing routine match reports). PsychoticIncall (talk) 11:43, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 17:42, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jesse Sylvia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No real indication of notability, only sources are routine 'match reports' on poker news sites and a stats database. Doesn't meet WP:NBIO. - UtherSRG (talk) 02:22, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I agree. Not really notable, even as a poker player, I would delete it. WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 02:39, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: California and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch 04:13, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note Three new sources have been made inclusion before this went AfD but after it went up as a proposed deletion. I now sincerly reach out to editors like UtherSRG with a question of what's more to add. Everything is in there; primary sources, local sources, stats database sources, routine match coverage sources, indepth match coverage sources. And even if someone would remark on there being only two scores you should keep in mind that one score is for $5,000,000 - and is a second place in the main event (world championship) - and the other is a win in a WPT Main Event (the largest set of tournaments next to the World Series of Poker) - both these scores alone should merit inclusion. PsychoticIncall (talk) 13:38, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Please read WP:SIRS. If you feel that the sources pass SIRS, please provide WP:THREE for evaluation. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:54, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep It's a bit silly asking for sources for such obvious results (events) as a main event 2nd place and a world poker tour win when it's obvious these events have taken place (with the selective outcome). Like asking for more sources too validate Stanley Cup or Super Bowl. That said - the three sources needed for evaluation is right there (ref: 3;4;5;6). PsychoticIncall (talk) 15:24, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Per WP:SIRS, the references must each be independent, reliable, and provide significant coverage. None of them provide significant coverage. You have obviously failed to read and understand WP:SIRS. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:19, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Could you be a bit more specific? The sources are specialized, but they do seem to be reliable, independent, and provide non-trivial coverage of the topic. Hobit (talk) 22:30, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Significant coverage is the only one I say couldn't be debated; of the sources have looked at, they are all about Jesse Sylvia doing something, whether it be his performance at a competition or otherwise. ✶Quxyz 02:43, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Pokernews is fine for new about Poker (unless it's on a list of non-RSes?). The local "boy does well" article is reliable, independent, and provides significant coverage. I think we're okay on meeting WP:N. Hobit (talk) 22:32, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:21, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, While there are no big name sources like NYT or AP, I scanned over a few and they seem good enough. ✶Quxyz 02:40, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Templates for discussion

edit