Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mario Bros. II

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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. —Darkwind (talk) 06:45, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mario Bros. II

Mario Bros. II (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats
)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Mario Bros. II and these other games have basically been on Wikipedia for years with at best one decent source. There's simply not enough value to the articles at hand to keep them here. For example, the below-mentioned Super Mario War has a dead link to Kotaku, which at the time was identified as a situational source. New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 19:29, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following for deletion for similar notability deficiencies:

Dian Shi Mali (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views
)
Kart Fighter (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Super Mario War (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Why are you nominating all of these things together? Super Mario War already went to AFD and it ended as keep, as the reliable sources found covering it were determined to be notable. Kindly look over the previous AFD and withdraw your nomination. [1] The closing administrator says "Siliconera is clearly reliable". MakeUseOf and Kotaku are both reliable source as well. All of them review it. Dream Focus 20:04, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Relist without bundling; these simply aren't similar enough to support a shared AFD listing. Super Mario War, in particular, has received some attention in the French gaming media (here from the French edition of
    Tom's Guide, and here from GamerGen). Sources are more limited for some of these other titles, but sorting out which have sources of what reliability will be a mess in a bundled nomination. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 20:15, 16 September 2013 (UTC) Meh, since this bundled listing is what we've got: keep Super Mario War and Kart Fighter, both of which easily have sufficient sources for inclusion. Neutral on Mario Bros. II: I'm having trouble finding reliable sources online, but what I've found suggests that print sources may have existed at some point. But there must be sources! -- I know, I know. Unofficial Commodore 64 software from 1987 is not a topic strongly covered by the modern web, however. Delete Dian Shi Mali: although there's tons of Google hits for the silly meme, there's nothing that's even in sight of a reliable source. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 22:42, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Siliconera and Joystiq are both situational; GameSpy's CG, IIRC, is a fansite that is simply hosted on GameSpy; the only one with real reliability is Kohler's review. Is one decent source really enough to justify that an article exist? - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 22:20, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The Joystiq article is written by a Managing Editor of the site. The Siliconera article seems to be by a paid staff member also, not just some random person's personal bit tossed up. Dream Focus 22:46, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not at all sure what you mean when you refer to sources as "situational". As for Classic Gaming, it has a declared staff list; despite the pseudonymous byline, the article in question was written by Kevin Bowen, who was definitively a writer for GameSpy itself (as well as the original contributor to Classic Gaming). Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 18:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As stated on
WP:VG/RS, Siliconera is only of value for either their own interviews or for Japanese-exclusive games. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 19:46, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
I think the case could be made that a Hong Kong-based bootleg primarily distributed in East Asia is, broadly speaking, in the same area of expertise as "Japanese-exclusive games". Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 22:42, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the
list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 23:59, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:59, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Super Mario War and Kart Fighter since they both have ample coverage in reliable sources, as mentioned above. Dream Focus 08:28, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have to wonder why such small subjects skirt by on having very, very few examples of notability. For a fictional character for example, I would never release an article that only had as small a list of reliable sources as these articles utilize. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 19:46, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Much, much worse referencing exists than these. With that said, I'll be working on a rewrite of Kart Fighter over the next few days. Time permitting, I'll try to clean up Super Mario War also. Both are capable of having fairly well-referenced articles. Neither do at the moment... Squeamish Ossifrage 22:42, 17 September 2013 (UTC) Kart Fighter rewritten. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 17:26, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Because most people come to Wikipedia to read articles like this, not to find an excuse to destroy them. They have sufficient examples of notability. And no one cares what articles you would or would not release. If you had it your way half of Wikipedia would probably be deleted. Please don't waste everyone's time nominating things that clearly pass the General Notability Guidelines. Dream Focus 00:19, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Given the improvements on Kart Fighter and the disparity between Super Mario War and MBII/Dian Shi Mali, I plan on relisting with only MBII and DSM. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 06:00, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:30, 23 September 2013 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mario_Bros._II&oldid=1069508125"