Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Super Mario: Blue Twilight DX (2nd nomination)

:{{la|Super Mario: Blue Twilight DX}} ([{{fullurl:Super Mario: Blue Twilight DX|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Super Mario: Blue Twilight DX (2nd nomination)}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

:({{find sources|Super Mario: Blue Twilight DX}})

Almost completely untouched since its nomination for deletion three years ago. Has few lines of worthwhile content, and no creation info whatsoever. No more special than many other fan games. The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 23:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 16:46, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
• Delete with extreme prejudice as per nominator. Andre (talk) 17:28, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
• Weak delete – there has been no other significant coverage besides being briefly featured on Attack of the Show (see 1st AFD, which is a mess, BTW). I also couldn't find any other significant coverage via reliable secondary sources. MuZemike 18:52, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 18 August 2009 (UTC){{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Super Mario: Blue Twilight DX (2nd nomination)||}}

• Weak redirect: Normally I'd say delete the fan game, but mention on Attack of the Show and by Kotaku's Brian Crecente establishes some notability. Not enough to warrant a separate article in my mind, but some notability nonetheless. Redirecting to List of Mario games by year or one of the other Mario games lists seems reasonable to me. Though I recognize leaving the article as a redirect would allow an editor to easily recreate the article, so if others decide to delete I won't oppose. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 19:19, 22 August 2009 (UTC))
• Delete: It has no development information and a slight amount of notability, but not enough for a stand-alone article. I really don't see where to redirect it to, seeing as it's not based on any specific Mario game, and there have been countless Mario fan-remakes/copies/etc.--_{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 22:17, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
• Delete per Zxc. Thanks! Fin©™ 20:29, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
• Delete (ec) This isn't even close to being verified by an appreciable number of reliable sources. [http://www.1up.com/do/feature?pager.offset=8&cId=3156339 101 free games] and [http://kotaku.com/gaming/free/free-mario-game-117293.php kotaku] are way too minor and lacking in content to be used for anything more than they are now. That leaves really just the AotS mention which, while perhaps appreciable, can't really establish significant coverage on its own. OR is needed to make this an article, which is a good sign it's not notable. There's no point in redirecting, as there's no mention on the proposed target page. ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs) 20:44, 23 August 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.