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 14:06, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

At Dead of Night[edit]

At Dead of Night (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

I couldn't find anything besides the sources used in the article. The TheGamer article is mostly gameplay with only three paragraphs of a review, though it was post-August-2020 and thus reliable enough. The Hey Poor Player review looks solid, but they're listed as inconclusive leaning unreliable. The DBLTAP source doesn't have much usable content and looks like churnalism. The FMV World one is only a database entry. QuietCicada (talk) 13:49, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. QuietCicada (talk) 13:49, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge

With Tim's article (the creator)

He's got an easily gng article, I'd say moving this game's stuff to his article might be a decent compromise. Not logged in, but this is user:heyallkatehere, Cheers. 2600:4040:5D92:EA00:F93:1E11:3E83:2F97 (talk) 14:49, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I could only find a brief preview in PC Gamer [1]. Sadly non-notable due to a lack of reliable secondary sources. Do not recommend a merge: what content in this article would be appropriately included in an article for an experienced composer other than a credit note? ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 20:25, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I patrolled this page a month or so ago and left a list of sources I found when reviewing it for notability on it's talk page. However, upon reviewing them again with the intention to vote to keep, I see a lot of red flags I should have caught. Concur with not merging per Vrxces. To review some of the sources not yet discussed:
  • Dual Shockers Listed as "not a high-quality source" which should be replaced when possible. While various pages describe policies relating to ethics and fact checking, the author of the article is not listed as a team member for the site, so it's likely to be an outside contributor (a noted concern at VGRS).
  • Breezy Scroll Not discussed anywhere in WP:RSP or WP:VGRS, list of team members is entirely informal, no listed editorial policies, no listed ethics policies, can't find any material which discusses the qualifications necessary to write articles, "About Us" is mostly promotional and otherwise useless.
  • FullSync.co.uk Basically identical concerns to Breezy Scroll.
  • MENAFN Churnalism of the Breezy Scroll article. —Sirdog (talk) 05:01, 15 October 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.