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 via WP:SPEEDY#G7: the only significant author concedes deletion in good faith. Marasmusine (talk) 21:12, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FutureRP[edit]

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

No ghits. Fairly new web game. Article written by creator. Fails WP:WEB. Article was speedied, then I restored per OPs request as he said he could fix it. PRODded the article but OP removed PROD, so here we are. Alexf^(talk) 21:50, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:WEB and WP:N. I was unable to find a single reliable source, using the WikiProject Video games guide to sources as a reference (as well as the WPVG custom Google search). All current sources out there are self-published, wikis, press releases, or are on sites specifically found to be unreliable by WPVG. Wyatt Riot (talk) 03:08, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As nom, and as the admin who processed the speedy, I still think, as I did then that it has not complied with WP:WEB. -- Alexf^(talk) 12:03, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment For further reference, here are the discussions with the OP before this AfD. -- Alexf^(talk) 12:03, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 13:47, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:GNG, cannot find any reliable sources. Pretty much same as Wyatt Riot. I see author is putting a good faith effort, but unfortunately the game currently fails Wikipedia notability guidelines as it has not received any media coverage. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 19:48, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As the author of the article, I understand your concerns, and formally submit to the article being deleted. If the deletion question is being asked now, then presumably, it would be an ongoing struggle to keep the article up. I would much rather have the page deleted until such as time as there are adequate sources to cite (n.b. I have a copy of the article in preparation of deletion).

This is the reason that I removed the PROD. I assumed that it would subject it immediately to the deletion process, and since the sources are just about as good as they're going to get for now, waiting for the PROD to expire seemed futile. I'm not privy the workings of Wikipedia, so this may have been a poor decision on my part; nevertheless, it is the reality of the situation. In summary, if the sources are inadequate as of now, feel free to delete the article. Save your time for more complex cases. Cyberkilla (talk) 22:48, 12 August 2011 (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.