Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dudebro II

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The result was withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) Davest3r08 >:) ^(talk) 15:45, 20 December 2023 (UTC)‎[reply]

Dudebro II

[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)

No sustained notability, merge with NeoGAF IgelRM (talk) 18:04, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw AFD per the sources added IgelRM (talk) 04:16, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Internet. IgelRM (talk) 18:04, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Failed video game, but there was enough coverage about it in RS, should be ok. Oaktree b (talk) 18:08, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Failed" is irrelevant. I'm recommending a merge (of what is mergeable) because it fails WP:NSUSTAINED IgelRM (talk) 18:19, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
AfD is not a place for merge proposals, see how to start a merge discussion at WP:PAM (mainly the "How to propose a merger" section). Jovanmilic97 (talk) 18:36, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but merge is still a common for AFDs and a merge would require condensing the article. IgelRM (talk) 12:41, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It won't have sustained coverage, it's dead. It meets GNG requirements with what's given already. Oaktree b (talk) 20:14, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm doubtful on GNG for a separate article with the sources about its NeoGAF origin. But I added Bitmob and RedBull articles mentioning "Dudebro" as a meme in gaming communities, which might have GNG outside NeoGAF. IgelRM (talk) 04:10, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The game might be cringe and also in development hell and/or cancelled, but it got WP:SIGCOV and that will never change. Wikipedia has never restricted games from having articles simply because they "failed" (otherwise, stuff like Hyenas (video game) wouldn't exist). Wikipedia is also not a crystal ball and games can be restarted and finished at any time (see Metroid Dread) so it is not in our purview to cast judgement on whether a game is truly "dead" or not. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:58, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And because I missed what the nomination was actually saying, yes it did get WP:SUSTAINED. Two sources are two years apart. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:06, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see the Verge source is from 2012. Although that is still more about the NeoGAF origin than the game, right? But it might be better to trim the article and perhaps consider a normal merger (like suggested above). IgelRM (talk) 12:50, 14 December 2023 (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.