Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Haggle (game)

: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 no consensus. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 02:05, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

=[[Haggle (game)]]=

:{{la|Haggle (game)}} ([{{fullurl:Haggle (game)|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Haggle (game)}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

A non-notable game that appeared as one game in a book of games. Stephen 23:47, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

:*Note: Splitting game from a bundled discussion. Tavix (talk) 00:05, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Aitias // discussion 00:20, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 22:49, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete - no evidence that it has achieved widespread notability. - Richard Cavell (talk) 23:31, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Not a vote, but a request for clarification; all of the individual games in the article A Gamut of Games have unwritten entry links. For consistency, if they are not acceptable topics for entries, they shouldn't have red links inviting people to write entries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hyphz (talk • contribs) 2009-01-01 22:02:19
  • Some might have been independently documented enough for an entry. {{On AFD|Patterns II (game)}} has been, for example. Some might have no independent documentation at all. Human knowledge is uneven. If one is compiling an accurate compendium of human knowledge, it has to be uneven in the same ways. Determining which games deserve articles involves looking for independent in-depth sources documenting each game, individually. You are welcome, and indeed encouraged, to do that research if you wish. Uncle G (talk) 04:15, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 03:39, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Foxy Loxy Pounce! 01:19, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

: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.