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 no consensus. Wizardman 19:50, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Omerta(mmorpg)[edit]

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

Article for an online MMORPG. I placed a prod tag on the article, which was removed by the article's original author. The game in question has been running for five years and apparently has recieved publicity in blogs and online forums, but seeing as those are not reliable sources, can't be considered in looking at the notability of the subject. There are no reliable sources nor any actual assertion of notability in the article. Unless these issues are rectified, I can't find any reason for this page to stay on Wikipedia. TheLetterM (talk) 11:39, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it because I was still working on it, I was busy translating the dutch version of this page to english again. I think it is a very big game, been playing it for years and thought that it should have a page. it has almost 500 000 google hits alone, so I am sure it is not only blogs that like it too? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phetora (talk • contribs) 11:54, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Right, if there are 500,000 google hits about Omerta, then most likely someone has written about it in a reliable source. Also, if there was an article about the game on Dutch Wikipedia, most likely that article itself cites reliable sources (otherwise, pending the equivalence of English and Dutch Wikipedia's notability policies, that article would have to be deleted from Dutch Wikipedia). Perhaps you should check the Dutch Wikipedia version of the article for references? TheLetterM (talk) 11:58, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

it is not only on the dutch wiki, but also on the german, the portuguese, i think it is on all wiki's besides this one. What do you want me to have look for exactly then? I am sorry. I am a newbe at this but am trying my best. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phetora (talk • contribs) 11:59, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the Wikipedia article on Reliable Sources. Reliable sources are reliable (meaning usually there is some kind of editing board that looks over and approves any content that goes public), third-party (meaning independent from the subject of the article) and published (meaning that it is available in print or electronic form). So say, if a gaming magazine like PC Gamer reviewed or did a feature on Omerta, that would be a reliable source. If a newspaper published an article about the game, that would be another reliable source. Usually on Wiki articles, these reliable sources are found in a section at the bottom of the page, usually titled "References" or "Notes". TheLetterM (talk) 12:11, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've been googling, are these concidered good? http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=168382 http://www.massiveonlinegamer.com/news/announcements/194-omerta http://www.gamingangels.com/2009/08/review-omerta/ http://www.newswiretoday.com/news/52248/ http://www.gamershell.com/pc/omerta/ http://pc.ign.com/objects/143/14354327.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phetora (talk • contribs) 12:24, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 12:34, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep IGN is a valid source, they may be web only but they are a major source for video game and computer game information, so it counts as the user asked for. --Cleave and Smite, Delete and Tear! (talk) 13:34, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - Looking at the above links: Massiveonlinegamer and newswiretoday have both printed press releases, which aren't useful for independent verification or notability. Gamingangels.com doesn't look reliable. GamerShell and IGN are reliable, bit these links are both directory entries, again not useful. The CVG article is a little stronger, but still strikes me as a re-worded press release: It only overviews the game, with a few soundbites from Biddick. No actual critical coverage. Web search hits for "+Omerta +MMORPG" just seems to be forum chatter and marketing. Marasmusine (talk) 00:11, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete This article fails points 3, 6 and 9 of WP:GAMECRUFT bigtime. If this article is kept it needs about 90% of its content removed and a major rewrite. --Teancum (talk) 02:14, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article does represent atleast a few sources that seem reliable. But agreed, the article needs some pruning to remove content not in accord with WP:GAMECRUFT. Bear in mind, the main author article says that the article is still a work in progress. Maybe we can revisit deletion at a later time. --Pink Bull (talk) 19:40, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, So Why 19:49, 15 October 2009 (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.