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 keep. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 01:19, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Skyrates[edit]

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

Doesn't seem to demonstrate adequate notability. The game has not been released yet (it is in open beta), and it was runner up (not winner) for a Gleemax award. The Gleemax website only existed for one year, so the notability of the award is questionable. It doesn't seem to have garnered much attention from press or anything else. The Wordsmith^Communicate 05:50, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, agree this is a case of not notable yet. Fails WP:N. Redfarmer (talk) 06:27, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep per sources found below. I'm still not overwhelmingly convinced but they appear enough for WP:N. Redfarmer (talk) 01:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 14:05, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a very well received and award winning game (I've just added a second award and some links) I think it achieves notability. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnBlackburne (talk • contribs) 19:01, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The notability of that award is questionable, as well. The only source that might help establish notability is a mention at VH1 that 404s, an archived version can be found here. Seems to be a trivial mention in a blog-like format. If this game was well-received, as you claim, then surely it must have been reviewed somewhere notable? There's nothing at Mobygames, or even GameFAQs, which has fairly low standards for including a game. The Wordsmith^Communicate 20:17, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Jay is Games is notable - see its talk page for some links, the page needs some work. The IGF is a real event. GameFAQs and MobyGames seem mostly set up to cover console games - I don't see online/browser games in either of their categories. JohnBlackburne (talk) 21:04, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Browser games are in fact covered by both. GameFAQs has Online/Browser and Flash, while MobyGames has Browser. But data for browser-based games is provided exclusively by the users of the sites, and GameFAQs has several restrictions on what browser and Flash games are allowed while MobyGames has none at all, so GF/MG's lack of a page for the game isn't necessarily a sign that a game isn't notable any more than lack of a Wikipedia article is a sign that a game isn't notable. I think its awards might be a better gauge. Reach Out to the Truth 18:20, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There's also an article on gamasutra, a mention on Rock, Paper, shotgun, a mention on IndieGames.com, a mention at SIGGRAPH, a mention at GameSetWatch, another mention at Gamasutra, another (very trivial) mention at GameSetWatch, a mention at IGN. SharkD Talk 05:03, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Good links from SharkD - the Gamasutra article refers to a "student postmortem" at gamecareerguide.com which will be indispensable for a Development section. Marasmusine (talk) 10:43, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources found above. MuZemike 16:08, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Easy Keep: per sources found above. - Ret.Prof (talk) 02:28, 30 November 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.