Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cyberia 2: Resurrection

:{{la|Cyberia 2: Resurrection}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Cyberia_2:_Resurrection Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Cyberia 2: Resurrection}})

Non-notable software, no independent sources, adequately covered at Cyberia (video game)#Cyberia 2: Resurrection WWGB (talk) 11:52, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ʍaɦʋɛօtʍ (talk) 12:04, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. ʍaɦʋɛօtʍ (talk) 12:04, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

• Merge as suggested by nom. I can find one review ( [https://www.gamespot.com/reviews/cyberia2-review/1900-2538490/]) and GameRanking gives a few others that may be offline, but nowhere close to consider GNG being met at this time. There may be more in print (1995 and all that), but I agree that the section in the Cyberia (video game) is completely sufficient but we do want the redirect to that. --MASEM (t) 12:49, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
• Redirect per nom and Masem as failing WP:GNG._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 13:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
• Merge/redirect This does not need an independent article, unfortunately it does not have the coverage to justify it. It remains, nevertheless, a valid section in an article and a valid search term. MartinJones (talk) 14:00, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
• Redirect per ZXCVBNM. Videogameplayer99 (talk) 18:52, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.