Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Video games

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Video games. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Video games|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Video games. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from August 2015) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Video games/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Video games-related deletions

Platinum Arts Sandbox

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

Fails WP:GNG Clenpr (talk) 14:37, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Software. Shellwood (talk) 15:30, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Roobet

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

There are a couple categories of claims to significance here, none of which I believe pass the bar of WP:NCORP. The first is being banned from Twitch. The announcements don't consist of significant coverage of the company itself, and largely don't focus on Roobet, naming it as one of the companies affected by the ban. The other is their sponsorships of a CS:GO tournament and various sports organizations. Notability is WP:NOTINHERITED from their sponsored tournaments and teams and sponsorship announcements are generally construed to fail WP:ORGTRIV. ~ A412 ^talk! 17:08, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Cryptocurrency, Companies, and Cyprus. ~ A412 ^talk! 17:08, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete my bet is that it is not notable. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 19:32, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Allin Kempthorne

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

I've AFD'd this, but actually I think it should be redirected to Wriggler (video game). There doesn't appear to be any independent, reliable sources giving significant coverage to the subject of this article. Sourcing is all tabloid news (The Mirror, The Sun, Metro) or passing mentions. Simply appearing on BGT (and not being recognised...) does not indicate notability. Simply being a bit-part actor in numerous films does not indicate notability. Additionally I have WP:PROMO/WP:COI concerns here.

They wrote the ZX Spectrum game Wriggler together with their twin when they were at school, and this game is clearly notable, but nothing else they have done appears to be notable.

Also nominating The Vampires of Bloody Island for deletion (no need to redirect this), which is the film Allin Kempthorne created. The only coverage that could be found for this is blatantly promotional ("we were forced to bring forward the release of this film because of an email campaign that no-one but us is the source for existing") and from sources of dubious reliability. Simply being nominated for a Twitter Shorty Award does not indicate notability.

Similarly also Learning Hebrew for the same reasons.FOARP (talk) 07:22, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Artists, Businesspeople, and Video games. FOARP (talk) 07:22, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Magic, Television, Entertainment, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fuzz Academy

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

Can't find a lick of reliable secondary coverage apart from a one sentence in an NPR profile of the creator, a successful author. I've added mention to the creator's biography based on that source. This can go. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 04:38, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Internet. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 04:38, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Marie Lu, where nom added a cited mention. ~ A412 ^talk! 04:40, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:04, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t think this page should be deleted. The creator’s Deviant Art Account has information about the site, under the username “mree”. There is little record of Fuzz Academy beyond their art uploads and commentary about the game in their posts. One day there may be even less record of it’s existence, save for a little stubby Wikipedia article - but at least it won’t become entirely lost media. Some of us still hold these forgotten, defunct games in our hearts, and to lose record of their existence is a saddening thought. 173.184.50.33 (talk) 22:04, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Habromania

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

Fails WP: GNG; subject has lack of significant coverage online, with only a single article from an unknown reliability website being passable. Other sources include the game's profile in reputable sources like IGN which include no significant coverage other than a single trailer. Other sources includes the game's website (primary source), an Instagram link (removed) and a marketplace link to a soft toy associated with the game. The game does not display sufficient notability and significant coverage to warrant its article. MimirIsSmart (talk) 02:41, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. MimirIsSmart (talk) 02:41, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. No reason for there to be an article about a game that's three (or four) years out with little coverage. Notaoffensivename (talk) 02:51, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per MimirIsSmart and Notaoffensivename's rationales. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 15:44, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, WP:TOOSOON and fails WP:GNG. ~ A412 ^talk! 23:01, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Lacks sufficient RSes to justify inclusion. We cannot include every game ever made by anyone ever on here. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 18:19, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spring Engine

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

Seems to fail WP:GNG. Previous AfD in 2010 was not very convincing, with a lot of trivial coverage thrown around. Notability is not inherited, so a game engine is not notable because the games it was used in are. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:59, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:59, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:15, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Couldn't find any reliable sources. JTZegers (talk) 18:22, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The article currently includes one piece of significant coverage: review in a print magazine fr:Linux Pratique. The previous AfD provided a link to Google Scholar search, the first two results are significant coverage: research papers about Total Annihilation: Spring (previous name of the engine): [1], [2]. Those three pieces of SIGCOV are enough for notability. If this discussion still determines the article to be deleted, I think the alternative to deletion is to merge the article to Total Annihilation#Engine remakes. --Mika1h (talk) 08:24, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I feel like the engine would be off-topic to mention in the Total Annihilation article itself, it's practically advertising as it only cites its own page. With regards to the research papers, WP:INDISCRIMINATE is not passed as they do not show how it is significant to the general reader. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:37, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry but I don't quite follow how WP:INDISCRIMINATE is related to notability. The papers show that the game is used in the field of research of artificial intelligence in video games. It's up to the editor(s) of the article to present that information palatable to the general reader. --Mika1h (talk) 19:30, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:22, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Toon Blast

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

Doesn't seem like a notable video game. Despite apparently being a big success, it has only gotten trivial mentions in reliable sources, besides the Pocket Gamer article that feels like a press release. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:13, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:13, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep: Pocket Gamer is a RS per Project Video Games here, so we have this [3] and [4]. Oaktree b (talk) 13:22, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:GNG says that "Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability." ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:50, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is also a RS, with a review [5], any of the sources listed here would be ok [6]. Common Sense media has also reviewed the game [7]. Another RS Oaktree b (talk) 14:27, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, that's a bit better. I still won't withdraw the nomination, as it only has 2 reviews. Usually the threshold is a few of them. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:40, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak~~ Keep per Oaktree I believe the sources makes this article barely survive deletion Scooby453w (talk)
There are sources posted on the talk page, WP:CSM and Gamezebo which is WP:VGRS.

That being said... the second line is copied from the Pocket Gamer source with minimal changes, and the Gameplay section is copied without attribution from Fandom. The article needs a complete rewrite. REAL_MOUSE_IRL talk 14:59, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Critical Blast does not seem like a WP:RS. So yeah, that's 2 reviews from reliable sources. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:15, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Peak Games, its developer. One of those match-3 games that has heavy prime time/daytime television advertisements obscuring what the object of the game actually is to draw people in (it isn't blasting toons or having fun with them, it's grinding match-3 levels with some bare continuity involving toon characters). Nathannah • 📮 22:00, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- not in a developed state, but found these three sources: (https://www.criticalblast.com/articles/2021/07/31/toon-blast-honest-review, https://www.commonsensemedia.org/app-reviews/toon-blast, https://www.gamezebo.com/reviews/toon-blast-review-saving-parents-one-game-at-a-time/) when reviewing it, and I think it's notable. Mrfoogles (talk) 01:37, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As I said above, Critical Blast does not seem like a reliable website at all. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:14, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Common Sense and two Gamezebo articles should be enough for GNG. This isn't Call of Duty, we have critical discussion in two publications, instead of three. I don't think we need to be so hung up on the number of reviews. This is more than we find for other mobile games that pop up here. Oaktree b (talk) 15:15, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's discussed here in a French newspaper. [8] and this is listed as a RS at Project Video Games [9]. Oaktree b (talk) 15:16, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The additional sources provided by oaktree have convinced me im not longer having my vote as "weak" keep Scooby453w (talk) 15:53, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Reviews by Gamezebo and Common Sense, and the article by PocketGamer are enough for GNG. Additional sources that I found: Softonic review (not necessarily a reliable source per WP:VG/RS) and the game is mentioned several times in this academic book published by Springer Nature: [10] (not necessarily significant coverage). --Mika1h (talk) 16:42, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Peak Games. In my opinion, the coverage provided does not demonstrate standalone notability. Video game news is so niche and scarce that sometimes smaller outlets will cover any game so long as someone pays them. Two outlets reviewed the game, so what? This article's existence is basically a free advertisement for the company, for a game that doesn't have any unique mechanics or gameplay – another run-of-the-mill, free-to-play mobile game ripping off Candy Crush. Yue🌙 07:45, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 03:32, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rise of Kingdoms

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

Fails WP:GNG. This game has got to hold the record for fewest words of review written per dollar earned, as there's been nearly nothing written about Rise of Kingdoms's gameplay. The article's reception section cites three unreliable sources and an Arkansas newspaper.

There's been slightly more written about its marketing and sales, but I don't think it's enough to hold an article about the game together. ~ A412 ^talk! 07:51, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ~ A412 ^talk! 07:51, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. No reasoning has been provided why the current sources are all unsuitable. Cortador (talk) 13:24, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Sources mostly don't constitute as notability after assessment (above). Not much content in the article aside from its advertising, basic gameplay and some reviews. MimirIsSmart (talk) 05:18, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to interpret this as a request for a source assessment table.

Source assessment table prepared by User:A412
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.lilithgame.roc.gp&hl=en&pli=1	Google Play store entry is written by the developer			✘ No
https://gameir.ie/review/rise-of-kingdoms-doesnt-rise-but-falls-flat/		This is a self-published blog. WP:BLOGS.		✘ No
https://www.clashofgaming.com/en/rise-of-kingdoms-everything-you-need-to-know-about-this-game		I don't know what this is, but it's not a reliable source. No bylines, no editorial policy, no about page.		✘ No
https://www.facebook.com/riseofkingdomsgame/videos/338745250181557/?__xts__[0]=68.ARBqF5dVNJo3rxUQmQryLq2N3UpXHLd_uHueSsu8liNin5tfu60wCvglXSaZ3Unq_qRgwYpDio2APDD5Cmp_BSyjcRXouAcULRwqjQXK9Gd2TKfqypXFNcRu5kvi291scAZvlQYdHMgPEWqAr0BotfMXZIBgUE8VTMY2nf7RcBOG7xHwacqO8jpL0nI4tr-qnpiC65OrWcHQT6gG7ZFSEbJ_3jY9g-AErip5yeuVmdgGvGlKTp2Max0S2zZUh5hG5D0FOiCeroYU-C983H9-BbHdEoqSznNm6tTN_hn46ZwbY-QdnSt5Ly2V9IvfBl0V0g-RGP6Sw-6x6sAV7tJjYItwFFRQQZ6m	Facebook page is owned by the developer.			✘ No
https://gamerant.com/strangest-mobile-game-ads/		Game Rant is an extremely low quality source that outputs a lot of churnalism (WP:VALNET) and consensus has been that it does not contribute to notability.	This is a two paragraph listicle entry. It's very debatable if this is significant coverage.	? Unknown
https://rok.lilith.com/en#:~:text=When%20progressing%20from%20the%20Stone,work%20to%20visit%20Chengdu%20Museum.	The game's website is published by the developer			✘ No
https://www.pocketgamer.com/rise-of-kingdoms/3-5bn-milestone/			This source narrowly focuses on this sales announcement. It's reliable for that fact, but the source does not discuss the game in general.	? Unknown
https://www.touchtapplay.com/rise-of-civilizations-is-an-epic-strategy-mmo-for-mobile/		This is not obviously reliable or listed as such anywhere. Previous WP:VG/RS discussion is unconvincing: [11]		? Unknown
https://technuovo.com/rise-of-kingdoms-review/		This is a group blog, per their about page.		✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20240721111549/https://mmohuts.com/news/rise-kingdoms-review/		Listed unreliable on WP:VG/RS		✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

(continued)

Source assessment table prepared by User:A412
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2019/sep/09/game-on-20190909/		Is the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette a reliable source for video games?		? Unknown
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Of the sources that come close to meeting reliability standards, there's one acceptable source reporting one specific announcement (Pocket Gamer), one that's probably acceptable if rather unusual (Arkansas Democrat-Gazette), and one source that's deficient in multiple ways (Game Rant). I don't think this adds up to WP:GNG in a way that the article can be primarily based on reliable sources.

~ A412 ^talk! 15:58, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What's your basis for assuming that sources like the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette don't contribute to notability? Cortador (talk) 15:09, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I described Arkansas Democrat-Gazette as "one that's probably acceptable if rather unusual". My contention is that it's the only source here that contributes to notability. ~ A412 ^talk! 15:11, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 05:01, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep I belive given the subject and the sources that this article barely passes afd though I might change my vote depending on further discussion Scooby453w (talk) 11:46, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
'Weak keep'https://www.scmp.com/tech/apps-social/article/3103066/blockbuster-chinese-games-said-boycott-huawei-and-xiaomi-app - Covered by three reliable sources: Arkansas Democrat-Gazette and Common Sense Media: [12] (both SIGCOV) combined with Pocket Gamer's (fairly short) article about the sales and a list entry on Pocket Gamer.biz: [13], I think it's just enough for notability. --Mika1h (talk) 15:40, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is a poorly written article, but there are sources --[14], [15] (possible paid content), [16], [17], [18], [19], and this book for some reason [20]. Again, this is a poorly written article, but the sources satisfy WP:NVG and WP:GNG, in my opinion. Albeit quite weakly, this passes in my opinion. Edit: sources are barely good enough for the GNG, but they pass. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 00:24, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Conheça Walt Disney World

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Video games

Video games-related deletions

Platinum Arts Sandbox

Roobet

Allin Kempthorne

Fuzz Academy

Habromania

Spring Engine

Toon Blast

Rise of Kingdoms

Proposed deletions

Redirects