Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BizHawk

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 delete. MelanieN (talk) 04:41, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BizHawk

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails

WP:V. BizHawk does get passing mentions in some reliable sources, but there's no significant coverage of the emulator itself. Woodroar (talk) 00:40, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Woodroar (talk) 00:41, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm seeing similar on the notability front. Delete. --Izno (talk) 01:17, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This emulator is so huge (from my perspective as a gamer and fan of speedruns, TAS and corruptions) that I can't fathom it being non-notable, but.... I can't come up with any sources. :(
✉ 07:25, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 03:55, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:49, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Something might be the world's best Foo farming tool, but if no one besides Foo farmers know about it, then it's still not notable. It appears only relevant in a tiny niche._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 05:38, 8 January 2018 (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.