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. MBisanz ^talk 01:44, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Solein[edit]

Solein (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

I cannot find any references to this computer game on the Internet, so I think it fails WP:Notability – because there is no significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Jll (talk) 16:56, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletions. MrKIA11 (talk) 18:49, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Google search shows nothing related; unable to even find the right 'Acid Games'. Unreleased, unadvertised, not notable. Maralia (talk) 22:39, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete if you read into the tone, you might conclude it hasn't been released yet. delete for crystalballing and notability that can't be verified with reliable sources. PHARMBOY (TALK) 22:47, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:ADVERT. Article seems to be nonchalantly engaging in self-promotion, but not enough for G11 criteria. MuZemike (talk) 23:12, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I should also add WP:CBALL to my reasons for deletion. Without reliable sources, the content is based off pure speculation. MuZemike (talk) 17:36, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried as much as possible to give infomation in my latest edit, I also provided a link to ACID.Games, but it is hard since the game is in very early stages. andypcx (talk) 16:25, 19 October 2008 (GMT)

Comment Hi andypcx. Have a look at the Wikipedia:Notability page, which describes the "notability" inclusion criteria for Wikipedia articles. If you know of any coverage of the game in reliable third party sources, then please add them to the article, ideally in a "References" or "External links" section (or list them here). Alternatively there may be none yet because it is such early days for the game (and most coverage will probably be in the form of reviews which won't be published until there is something to review), in which case the article is probably destined to be deleted. However this need not be the end — if the current article doesn't survive, but the game later receives significant third party coverage then a new article can be written. Jll (talk) 17:21, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It can certainly be recreated once significant coverage via verifiable sources start coming in. I would recommend userfying the article so you can keep working on the content of the article in the meantime; once it meets the WP:GNG, you can then recreate the article on the mainspace. MuZemike (talk) 17:39, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, no coverage. Nifboy (talk) 14:33, 22 October 2008 (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.