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. - Philippe 23:41, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TetraVex[edit]

Non-notable computer puzzle game. Unless being bundled with some other games is notable, there is no claim of notability. I prodded and de-prodded the article after an editor raised a flag on the talk page. -- Swerdnaneb 15:34, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related-related deletion discussions. -- Beloved Freak 16:45, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. Someone another 16:52, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I'm not sure it isn't notable. Over 500,000 google hits on the title, and I'd say it's a unique title. There might be problems with independant sources. The game is real, "published" and looks quite widespread. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 18:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Being included as part of Microsoft Entertainment Pack is at least a claim to notability. If reliable sources can be found I'd strongly suggest that this be kept.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 20:18, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep It was part of the Windows Entertainment Pack 3 and Windows Best Of Entertainment Pack, both of which have sold a considerable amount. It may not be the most popular game on there, but it does have a significant claim to notability. It contains valuable information on a popular game. Frankly, I don't see a single reason for deleting it. Rdbrewster♪♫♪ 12:29, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or delete; insufficient coverage for an article of its own, but might fit into an article on the entertainment packs mentioned above. Percy Snoodle (talk) 13:28, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, are you saying that if there isn't an article to merge Tetravex into (right now I don't think there is) then it should be deleted? Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 13:36, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The inclusion into the entertainment pack makes it sufficiently notable. User:Krator (t c) 13:14, 21 April 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.