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:

Edit this page 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

MaxPlay Classic Games Volume 1

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

Unreferenced article which was formerly BLAR'd into a page where this game compilation was not mentioned. Doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG from my searches for sources. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 05:59, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are references on the talk page which should be sufficient to mention it at Datel, but aren't enough from WP:GNG. That feels like a more useful redirect target even if it's not currently mentioned (note that CodeJunkies redirects to Action Replay currently). --Pokechu22 (talk) 07:08, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Does not demonstrate sufficient notability and not a good redirect either. MimirIsSmart (talk) 05:41, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Datel#MaxPlay_Classic_Games_Volume_1 (now mentioned there, and a more fitting target than Action Replay. --Pokechu22 (talk) 06:04, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

From talk page

Nintendo Official Magazine had a review of MaxPlay.^[1] (Unsurprisingly, it's fairly negative.)

There's also a mention in PSX Extreme which seems more about the disc being hard to dump than the game itself.^[2] It's probably not useful to establish notability, but it is interesting to see a reference to Datel discs being weird in a print magazine (I personally know this affects other Datel discs but it doesn't seem to be mentioned there).

All other results I could find were in advertisements. There probably is at least one more magazine review in something that hasn't been digitized (e.g. CUBE) but currently there definitely isn't enough for an article.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Pokechu22 (talk • contribs) 01:48, October 12, 2020 (UTC)

References

^ Scott, Dean (July 2004). "Review: Max Play 01". Nintendo Official Magazine. No. 142. p. 97. ISSN 0965-4240.
^ Yohko; Teruo (April 2005). "szara strefa". Hardkor. PSX Extreme [pl] (in Polish). No. 92. p. 77. ISSN 1429-172X.

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:19, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Real Flight Simulator

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

Rationale Non-notable per WP:GNG. Sourcing only supported by user-generated review scores.

Source search: No MobyGames page. Nothing on the reliable sources search engine. Metacritic has no reviews for the title. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 23:44, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Aviation. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 00:34, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No coverage in reliable sources. ~ A412 ^talk! 19:42, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dekete - besides the lack of significant coverage, it appears to have been written with generative AI. Bearian (talk) 06:08, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gameplay of Hearthstone

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

This is the same scope as Hearthstone, which already covers the gameplay, including its development and reception. This fork re-uses many of the same sources, and writes a worse article that focuses more on material that violates WP:VGSCOPE and WP:GAMEGUIDE. There is a consensus at the Video Games WikiProject that we shouldn't create this type of WP:REDUNDANTFORK, since there is nothing here that isn't covered at Hearthstone, or some of the details about competition in Hearthstone in esports. I understand that a game with this much esport competition will naturally have more people discussing the finer points of gameplay, but this violates WP:VGSCOPE and WP:GAMEGUIDE. I would consider a redirect (or even an alternate way to split the main Hearthstone article), but I don't see material that would be suitable for a merge. Shooterwalker (talk) 19:25, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games. Shooterwalker (talk) 19:25, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep , but refocus the page to be about the expansions to Hearthstone; that section, at least from what I last worked on it, was using third-party sources to discuss each expansion and what it added in broad terms. I agree the gameplay is mostly repetitive of what's in the main article, but if this were refocused to cover only the expansions and those details about them, it would be more routine of the type of article about DLC/expansion content for a living game. And if kept in that fashion, I'd move the table that's on the main Hearthstone page to that, since that's weighing the main page of Hearthstone down a lot. --Masem (t) 19:30, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Depending on what other editors say, I would consider a rename and rewrite around Expansions of Hearthstone. I maintain that Gameplay of Hearthstone is redundant. But it's normal for there to be Wikipedia articles about notable game expansions, and there doesn't seem to be a Hearthstone article like this, yet. Shooterwalker (talk) 19:40, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep expansion content and move to List of Hearthstone expansions / Expansions of Hearthstone, which seems to be the genuinely notable topic here. I would advocate to Redirect the current title to Hearthstone as a plausible search term and subtopic. Masem's reasoning seems sound. ~ A412 ^talk! 03:13, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or at best transwiki to Wikibooks. It fails WP:INDISCRIMINATE, as there isn't really an argument that Hearthstone's gameplay is separately notable, if even Dragon Quest's gameplay got removed. I would not be surprised if Gameplay of Overwatch was also sent to the chopping block in the near future and the whole category was deleted. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:26, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, but rename to Expansions of Hearthstone or List of Hearthstone expansions per Masem and A412. This article really doesn't go into too much detail about the normal gameplay and it would not be covered by WP:GNG. I mean we have [1] and [2], plus plenty more that go into each specific expansion. Conyo14 (talk) 21:09, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kristoffer von Hassel

AfDs for this article:

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

This is a pretty clear example of WP:BLP1E. The sources all say the same thing with very little variation in the information they provide, and several of them are clearly re-hashed versions of the same report or press release. None of the sources says anything about von Hassel himself, which is very natural as he was 5 years old at the time, but a WP:BEFORE search doesn't yield anything more current, or more in-depth. I thought this might be a good source, since it was published a couple of years later – but it only repeats the same info in new packaging (adding the dubious claim that he "has his own Wikipedia page"). Other than that, there's just the flurry of short press reports from April 2014 to support this entire article. The "world's youngest hacker" claim was clearly unverifiable and pretty weak to begin with, since it redefines what a "hacker" is – so what is the claim to notability here, really? bonadea contributions talk 16:23, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. bonadea contributions talk 16:23, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. WP:BLP1E without any WP:LASTING coverage. Jfire (talk) 17:41, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Computing, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:08, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom. A fun little story that surely helps websites get clicks, but absolutely not enough to support a BLP article on the person in the story. Not opposed to a brief mention somewhere in an Xbox article where it could make sense. Sergecross73 msg me 19:19, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - we have tended to delete minors who have become marginally notable as children for one thing they did as kids. Bearian (talk) 02:04, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aimsey

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

only notability is being a part/member of a minecraft server. the only reliable sources that are used are dotesports and ign, and they are mostly mentioned in passing, no in depth coverage. Http iosue (talk) 03:57, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Video games, Internet, and Wales. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:41, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no WP:SIGCOV and relies on primary sources too much jolielover♥talk 16:55, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Wikipedia has a wealth of less-than-notable streamer articles with no WP:SIGCOV merely because they have a whole lot of subs on YouTube and/or followers on Twitch, this is definitely one of them. MimirIsSmart (talk) 07:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fedmyster

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

his only notability is the controversial stuff he did, and being a former org member. little actually encyclopedic useful information. Http iosue (talk) 22:29, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete: This is about him [3], some coverage in gaming sites. Got hit after hit on GameRant, but that's an iffy source. One more decent source, we'd be ok Oaktree b (talk) 00:33, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Internet, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:26, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retro Engine

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

Appears to have significant original research and I do not see how the notability concerns on Talk:Retro Engine were resolved. IgelRM (talk) 23:51, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. IgelRM (talk) 23:51, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Christian Whitehead. The engine's developer is notable, and the engine itself has received enough coverage that full deletion would be silly. I created this article when I was still pretty inexperienced and think it'd be better off to dedicate a section of Whitehead's article to it, and then possibly split it off in the future if it becomes too big/unwieldy to contain everything there. JOE BRO ⁶⁴ 00:01, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per above. (Shame on me for forgetting to pursue this years back. I thought I had.) Sergecross73 msg me 00:35, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Christian Whitehead per above. I would have just boldly merged this for having the exaggerated swagger, amount of content and relevance of a well-referenced section in proposed target article. MimirIsSmart (talk) 07:21, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chrome Engine

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

Prose is entirely original research. Does not appear to have standalone notability, suggesting redirect to Techland. IgelRM (talk) 23:18, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. IgelRM (talk) 23:18, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Techland. This is not notable for a stand alone article. Mekomo (talk) 14:03, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Redirects

[1] Scott, Dean (July 2004). "Review: Max Play 01". Nintendo Official Magazine. No. 142. p. 97. ISSN 0965-4240.

[2] Yohko; Teruo (April 2005). "szara strefa". Hardkor. PSX Extreme [pl] (in Polish). No. 92. p. 77. ISSN 1429-172X.

[1]

[2]