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. postdlf (talk) 01:44, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Golf Kingdoms[edit]

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

No evidence of satisfying Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Sourced to two press releases, a very short review on a site of uncertain notability, and another review on an amateur site run by a group of bloggers. The article was proposed for deletion over a year ago, but the PROD was removed by an editor who wrote "Notability is questionable, but the article actually shows some reviews". (Although it is not in itself a reason for deletion, it is worth mentioning that the article was created by an editor who has since been indefinitely blocked as a spammer, and it does seem likely that this article was written with promotional purpose.) JamesBWatson (talk) 09:39, 28 June 2013 (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) 15:50, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:50, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No reliable [[WP::VG/RS]] hits. I see a 148apps.com review, which is not listed as VG/RS, but their editorial makes them situational at least. appadvice.coms is similar, but doesn't appear reliable, more like a blog. Besides press releases and directory entries, that's all I see though, not enough to pass WP:GNG. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 17:44, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 03:58, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No coverage in reliable sources. -- Whpq (talk) 16:19, 9 July 2013 (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.