This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2010 December 12. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
The result was delete. Black Kite (t) (c) 00:46, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Available sources limited to press releases and unreliable websites (WP:RS), therefore does not appear to pass notability threshold for inclusion (WP:N) Marasmusine (talk) 19:02, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
“If the page can be improved, this should be solved through regular editing, rather than deletion. A variety of tags can be added to articles to note the problem.”
A comprehensive research for references is not only a quick search via google but also covers a wide variety of different sources ranging from printed papers up to audio, video, and multimedia materials. Just by recall the past I remember for example that the satellite television channel NBC Europe NBC Europe did have quite a lot of reportages and interviews about Rappelz in their program NBC GIGA Games [1]. Some of them are available to watch in you tube [2][3]. I am pretty sure it is possible to get those reportages from NBC archive. Also a search at their web page reveals several articles about Rappelz [4]. All of those would be suited to full fill the criteria of being a reliable source, as can be seen in the article "Identifying reliable sources" (WP:RS) under the topic of "News organizations" and the following. This could be a source of improving the general quality of the content whole article. In generally you should not expect to find a lot of reliable sources in the field of massively multiplayer online role-playing game since there is still a lack in science to cover up those. However as the growing numbers of publications, e.g. a search at science with the keywords “world of warcraft” [5] reveals, they are catching up fast. Another good resource for getting hard data and a reliable source for improving the quality of Rappelz would be a research in the field of economics, since here is the link between the virtual world and real world. However one should not fall in the trap to think those so called reliable source are the only existing truth existing.
So my suggestion is in a first step improve the reviewing process of the rappels article. I also suggest reviewing not only its sources but also its content. In a second step I suggest to improve the overall content of the article, rather then deleting it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.160.171.192 (talk) 17:07, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]