Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Remothered

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. No consensus on a redirect, but definitively that the sources provided so far (and not just asserted to exist without evidence) do not support an article. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:05, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Remothered

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

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

No evidence of notability. Fail WP:GNG. - Mr X 12:09, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:42, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: References does not prove the subject is notable.--Historical Ben (talk) 22:18, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

_{Striking vote of CU confirmed sock. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:28, 21 October 2016 (UTC)}[reply]

I can't review these sources at work, but they are all listed at WP:VG/RS: RPS 1, Siliconera, 4gamer, RPS 2, GameInformer. From the Google preview, that's probably enough for a line or two somewhere in the either the Clock Tower series article or one of the video games in that series. As a result, merge the WP:RS content. --Izno (talk) 11:53, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
After review, delete: there are no secondary sources covering the topic in depth. --Izno (talk) 19:45, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: it's a largely reliable subjet into indie universe of gaming full of sources everywere on the web.--Gibenormann (talk) 12:50, 19 October 2016 (UTC) — Gibenormann (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Merge per Izno ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 18:20, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: remothered is an important chapter into indipendent game universe. just take a look on the web googlin 'remothered'--Follyinman (talk) 01:50, 20 October 2016 (UTC) — Follyinman (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Note to the closing admin: I believe Follyinman and Gibenormann may be socks. --Izno (talk) 11:15, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Izno's sources would theoretically be good, but they either don't mention the game or are cursory mentions (hits were likely because of reader comments). Nothing near significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources (?) so as to warrant a separate article. czar 05:47, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Czar: I was pretty sure I saw at least one source which wasn't in-passing, but I can take a look tonight when I get home. Even in-passing is fine for a brief mention (a sentence) in another article since the only requirements on the point are WP:WEIGHT--and the merge target doesn't exactly have much content as it is. --Izno (talk) 11:15, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I know, but there are no such sources @Dissident93 courtesy ping czar 15:01, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A redirect to Clock Tower would work at the very least then. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 18:28, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Dissident93: That redirect would be deleted at WP:RFD because its topic would not be mentioned in the target article. I've stricken my !vote after review. --Izno (talk) 19:45, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not discussed in reliable sources. Until there's some substantial content written by some RSs, it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. TarkusAB 02:30, 21 October 2016 (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.