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. This applies to the stub now at Kingdom Hearts III (video game). The longer and substantially different article about the same topic, Kingdom Hearts III, is unaffected by this outcome and would need a separate discussion in order to be deleted. Sandstein 13:34, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kingdom hearts 3 (video game)[edit]

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

No sources, not even created yet, only hearsay and rumour. Time to write an article on this if and when it (a) is published and (b) receives significant coverage in reliable sources. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:29, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Unsourced, WP:CRYSTAL violation. - TexasAndroid (talk) 20:32, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 03:23, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The name hasn't even been registered yet. Jørdan 03:52, 9 January 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) 19:13, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:13, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Isn't notable, has no sources, future game, etc. When it does become notable, it will be at Kingdom Hearts III, unless a real name is given. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 19:20, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:HAMMER. We can't just assume the game it's going to be called Kingdom Hearts III (or 3 for that matter). Insignificant coverage to merit more than a mention in the series article, which it has. --Teancum (talk) 08:56, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Article can be made good. Similar to how Chrono Break is an article on a trademark, and The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword was once about an artwork and a few elements, Kingdom Hearts III's article can exist as long as reaction and coverage can be shown (and there has been significant amounts of it). - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 22:53, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- There isn't much that can be said that isn't said in the short paragraph in Kingdom Hearts#Future titles. This is also the wrong name for the title. If somebody wants to find "reaction and coverage", then that would be awesome. But the thing is, this is the wrong title, has no good content in it, thus it should be deleted. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 04:14, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the concerns by Teancum and JamesBWatson. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:38, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect and merge if needed to Kingdom Hearts series where there is some material on this already per WP:PRESERVE. Hobit (talk) 19:26, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Kingdom Hearts, as that page has at least sourced material about the title, while this only has speculations.Tintor2 (talk) 22:18, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Created an article at Kingdom Hearts III, so redirect to there. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 00:06, 16 January 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.