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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:06, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Arthic[edit]

Arthic (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

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

This game is no longer up at its website. It appears to be dead, no valid Google links besides this article. This article should be closed unless the game is to be reopened. If anyone can understand the Polish at that site, maybe they can help? GreetingsEarthling (talk) 16:19, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. Greg Tyler ^{(t • c)} 17:15, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Delete. Since the game was notable, it shouldn't be deleted just because it's no longer around. Sodam Yat (talk) 19:10, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the original comment was due to the fact that the argument was that it is no longer around. I took a longer look, and I can't find any real strong articles to support notability, so I'm thinking it could go on those grounds too. Sodam Yat (talk) 03:31, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I see what you're saying about the game no longer needing to exist. I stand by my delete, though, because as you've said there aren't any real strong arguments for notability. The awards it was given and articles which discussed it are all of questionable value, at best. GreetingsEarthling (talk) 21:39, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• • ^{[citation needed]}. 81.110.104.91 (talk) 21:58, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no assertion of ... well, anything. 81.110.104.91 (talk) 21:58, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: If it was new, I'd say "give it some time," but it's been there since January and no-one cared to expand it. Seb az86556 (talk) 22:02, 7 August 2009 (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.