Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Game (dice game)

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

Contested prod. My prod rationale was: "No reliable sources. Gameboardgeek pages can be added by anyone, so not a reliable source. Need outside independent sources showing some reason why anyone reading an encyclopedia would care." The person who removed the prod claimed to add reliable sources but simply added text from sites selling the game, failing criteria for independent non-trivial sources. There's no indication that this meets any Wikipedia criteria for notability. DreamGuy (talk) 16:46, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

• Keep. There's a corresponding [http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das_Spiel_(W%C3%BCrfelspiel) article in the German Wikipedia] and a reasonable number of [http://news.google.ca/archivesearch?q=%22Reinhold+Wittig%22+%22das+spiel%22&btnG=Search&um=1&ned=ca&hl=en Google news hits]. My German's pretty rusty, but [http://www.abendblatt.de/extra/service/944949.html?url=/ha/1981/xml/19810103xml/habxml810103_175.xml this article] seems to indicate that this game won an award (Verleihung des Kritikerpreises). Pburka (talk) 16:59, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
• Keep I added the award with a reliable reference. It is also linked from Spiel des Jahres --Thommey (talk) 17:29, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
• Speedy Keep Bogus AfD nomination; edit in question is here [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Game_(dice_game)&diff=278757402&oldid=278108932] Reliable Sources were added, including an inline citation of a non-trivial published book that covers the game (and several variations) in detail. I added no text from any external sites as the nominator claimed and only added citations and updated the infobox.

:Per WP:RSUE Reliable Sources are not required to be English only: Because this is the English Wikipedia, for the convenience of our readers, editors should use English-language sources in preference to sources in other languages, assuming the availability of an English-language source of equal quality, so that readers can easily verify that the source material has been used correctly.

:See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isabella Nardoni case for one example of this.

:Citations for The Game (dice game):

:*{{cite book

| last = Glonneger

| first = Erwin

| authorlink =

| title = Das Spiele-Buch

| edition = Neue u. erg. A.

| date = 1999

| publisher = Drei Magier Verlag

| language = German

| isbn = 3-9806792-0-9

| url= http://www.spielbox.de/spielarchiv/kmw/spibuch.htm

}}

:*{{cite web

| url = http://www.perlhuhn.de/spiel.html

| title = Spiel von Reinhold Wittig und anderen (1979)

| accessdate = 2009-03-20

| publisher = Edition Perlhuhn

| language = English, German

}}

:*{{cite web

| url = http://www.abacusspiele.de/neueseite/?m=spiele&catid=4&id=25

| title = Abacusspiele: Das Spiel

| accessdate = 2009-03-20

| publisher = Abacusspiele

| language = German

}}

:*{{cite web

| url = http://www.abacusspiele.de/neueseite/?m=spiele&action=download&pdf=82

| title = Das Spiel - Rulebook

| accessdate = 2009-03-20

| format = PDF

| publisher = Abacusspiele

}}

:*{{cite web

| url = http://www.abacusspiele.de/neueseite/?m=spiele&action=download&pdf=79

| title = Das Spiel - Rulebook

| accessdate = 2009-03-20

| format = PDF

| publisher = Abacusspiele

| language = German

}}

:--Tothwolf (talk) 17:10, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

:Note: removed stray '|' from the link provided by Pburka. --Tothwolf (talk) 17:35, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

• Keep - I can't read anything in the nom that hasn't been addressed or is relevant. Jenuk1985 | Talk 19:11, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
• Keep Spiel des Jahres is one of the most significant awards in the field of boardgame design. The game's longevity also suggests notability. I would prefer more independent third party coverage, however, and it is a problem that a lot of the German language references are primary source. AngoraFish 木 23:15, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
• Keep – the sources are there, notability is clearly established. MuZemike 00:16, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
• Keep several independant sources, won a notable award. Edward321 (talk) 15:24, 22 March 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.