Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Avengers (video game)

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 keep. Jujutacular (talk) 02:40, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Avengers (video game)

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

Non-notable video game. This video game was never actually released. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 23:05, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It was covered by numerous reliable sources. Before its unofficial reveal.[1][2]. After the reveal: [3][4][5]. There are way more than the sources I have just listed. AdrianGamer (talk) 14:25, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video games-related deletion discussions. AdrianGamer (talk) 06:43, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. That it wasn't released doesn't mean there shouldn't be an article about it (see Category:Cancelled video games for instance). Other sources: EW, Engadget, Kotaku. It received attention from reliable sources, that is the reason why there's an article. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 06:48, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - There may be sources on the subject "out there", but there are virtually none in the article itself. Only two references, and one of them says absolutely nothing about the article subject and is simply thrown in there as a "by the way, this other Avengers game is coming out." At this point I think WP: Blow it up and start over makes more sense than vaguely hoping that someone will put in the huge amount of editing needed to get the article up to notability standards.--Martin IIIa (talk) 13:52, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Cancelled games are as eligible as any other for an article, and numerous RSes demonstrably exist for this one. No reason to delete. Phediuk (talk) 01:26, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Again, the theoretical existence of good reliable sources is meaningless so long as there are none within the article. If the sources AdrianGamer and Sotermans have listed really contain information that can be used in the article, then why is no one adding them to the article? See WP: Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#There must be sources.--Martin IIIa (talk) 13:12, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unless your suggesting that the three directly linked sources somehow become theoretical solely due to the fact that they were presented here than directly in the article that claim has no merit since by presenting them they are by definition not theoretical. AFD is also not cleanup.--67.68.161.51 (talk) 17:15, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - per sources provided by AdrianGamer above. Could use some cleanup, sure, but not nearly bad enough for a WP:TNT. Sergecross73 msg me 14:31, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - There is nothing requiring cancelled video games not be listed in the encyclopedia, especially if there is reliable sources that establish notability. -- Dane2007 ^talk 18:39, 22 August 2016 (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.