Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cafu Engine

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. ✗plicit 23:45, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cafu Engine

[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)

Fails WP:GNG. Two potential sources are listed in the article text from a German tech/software magazine, but both are inaccessible (see Gleich and Nebelo et al). Gleich appears to be a very brief (2-paragraph) review, evidently of the product under a previous name. Nebelo et al. appears to be a list of 125 pieces of software with very brief descriptions of each as part of an article celebrating the publication, based on the preview, which would not constitute significant coverage. WhinyTheYounger ※ Talk 15:17, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Software. WhinyTheYounger ※ Talk 15:17, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Article is a glorified advertisement for the engine; no currently notable games use this engine and it isn’t notable enough to have its own article in the first place; it should be deleted as soon as possible. NanaOn-Sha (talk) 07:22, 30 July 2023 (UTC) sock puppet NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:29, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article is not notable, and its secondary sources reflect niche technical applications that do not establish general notability. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 23:05, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Lack of significant coverage in reliable sources; fails WP:GNG, and I don't think there's any SNGs that would apply. Maybe WP:WEBCRIT? But it also fails that. Actualcpscm (talk) 17:45, 5 August 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.