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 keep. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:08, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Astral Chain[edit]

[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)

Unreleased video game. The publisher has scheduled a release date, but coverage in independent sources is necessarily lacking. It may become notable some time after released, that will be time for an article. —teb728 t c 11:56, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ~Ruyaba~ {talk} 12:01, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. ~Ruyaba~ {talk} 12:01, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question: So why exactly can't this be redirected or merged to PlatinumGames per WP:ATD? Regards So Why 12:07, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect without deleting to PlatinumGames until it becomes independently notable nearer or after its release, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 13:41, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Question: Do Variety, Kotaku, IGN, Polygon, Forbes, Gamespot, Game Informer, Engadget, etc. not count as "independently notable" sources? It's a retail game by a notable video game developer (Platinum Games) and very notable publisher (Nintendo). Links to some of these articles can be added to the page if needed.Froo (talk) 19:35, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Froo: Can you provide us with those sources please? Regards So Why 17:31, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
See below. Or do the most basic of basic Google searches. Sergecross73 msg me 16:16, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to PlatinumGames. AdrianGamer (talk) 17:12, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Game received a ton of coverage already. The problem here is sloppy article writing and nominations, not notability.

Sergecross73 msg me 16:07, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per sources above. JOE BRO 64 16:20, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - if this discussion ends with a consensus to keep the article, I will be more than willing help write up a better article, especially with the citations Sergecross73 has listed above. I had recently helped polish the article for The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening (2019 video game), just as a note. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 14:14, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I was already convinced this would be a keep before I even landed here and saw he abundant additional sourcing linked above; this is no mere fly-by-night independent production which may disappear into the ether, but rather a project by a major developer that is therefor predictably receiving substantial coverage. We need not have a complete product before beginning an article--indeed, for mos media topics, our article well precedes a release date. The coverage of individual sources may not be super deep given what is known at this time, but it is sufficiently deep and very broad. With respect to the nom, who clearly opened this discussion as a good faith effort at clean-up, the nomination was still a poor one without a proper implementation of WP:BEFORE. Snow ^{let's rap} 05:19, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I did another Google search just for giggles and there seem to be new stories from reputable sites popping up daily in addition to the ones mentioned above. Article can be fixed through normal editing. ZettaComposer (talk) 15:27, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. My question notwithstanding - which was about why this was brought here in the first place and without having checking for sources - I do agree that this seems indeed to be a significantly covered and thus notable game even before release. A serving of WP:TROUT might be in order for the WP:BEFORE failure. Regards So Why 15:41, 21 February 2019 (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.