Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don't Die, Mr. Robot!

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. Consensus that the article meets notability standards. (non-admin closure) J 947^{^{^{(c) (m)}}} 04:49, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Die, Mr. Robot![edit]

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

Almost empty article. No references or indication of importance MrMarmite (talk) 23:43, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:50, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Meets the WP:GNG.

It also received coverage for being a PlayStation Plus selected title as well. Sergecross73 msg me 01:56, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ - Contrary to what the previous user said, it doesn't meet GNG. Push Square is not a recognized source. Pocket Gamer and Touch Arcade are the only 2 reliable/significant sources, and the mention in Playstation Blog is only a few words. Usually the threshold is 3 significant mentions._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 08:07, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Push Square isn't classified as reliable or unreliable at the Video Games Source List, but that in itself isn't a reason to discount it outright. There's arguments for reliability. It is the the sister-site of of NintendoLife, which is classified as a reliable source, and was created in 2009 by NintendoLife staff. They've got an established staff, complete with editorial oversight, and the article was written by one of the editors, Sammy Barker, a college educated professional writer. Sergecross73 msg me 12:40, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All right, I'm not opposed to changing my vote if we can get a consensus on its reliability, as it's a fairly common site._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 22:46, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I think it scrapes by. RE PushSquare: what's good for the goose is good for the gander. — TPX 20:21, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:41, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Article improved to the point of a keep. MrMarmite (talk) 04:01, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I'd like to change my vote to Keep per what I said earlier, it seems Push Square has been proven reliable. I will add it to the WP:VG Source list._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 13:09, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's a stub yeah, it's bit blank but that not mean you just delete it, you should nominate it for Wikipedia:Today's articles for improvement, it's seem nomineer have a harass --Builder8360 (talk) 19:15, 15 August 2017 (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.