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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:42, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fricket[edit]

Fricket (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Chronically incapable of getting sources for any kind of notability whatsoever, and quite frankly reeks of trolling. Was hit with a PROD in 2007 which was removed almost immediately without any justification other than the single word 'notable' in the edit log. The account that de-PROD'd it had a single other edit; dePRODing a redirect page with the same lack of reason and the edit log 'notable'. Had no secondary sources of any kind in 2009 when I flagged it for notability, and it is in no better of a state now. Both citation links on the page are dead, and the homepage of one of them appears suspiciously like the domain was purchased with the express purpose of being used as a citation here. Frankly this page is a farce and should probably have been dealt with back when the PROD was removed without justification in 2007. -Joey- (talk) 20:49, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:00, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. No evidence of notability, probably fails WP:MADEUP. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 17:40, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - I looked around a bit for some sources, both under the name "Fricket" as well as the various other names it gives in the opening, and I did get some hits. So, it was not an intentional hoax or troll. However, pretty much every source that I do find are things such as blogs and tumblr posts. There has not been, as far as I can find, any actual coverage of this by a reliable source. It just seems like this is a game that is actually played in some parts, but never got widespread recognition or popularity, and thus has not garnered enough notability to have an article. 64.183.45.226 (talk) 23:48, 27 September 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.