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.
Fails
GNG and
NRVE. Current sources do not indicate notability, and a search for sources gives either mirrors of the MQGF, or passing mentions. Kotaku article may be the only thing that can be a reliable source, but I am unsure of its significant coverage; it does say the game exists, but only in one paragraph. It was given one Bronze award from a games festival.
The significant coverage is self-published, from the author. Aside from a mention of the game in commentary, the questions themselves do not establish significance.
✘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}}.
Comment I added extra sources to the main article, some extra information from said sources,including the dissertations where the game was cited and featured,I'm doing my best since I don't speak portuguese, I'll add some extra information when I have the time to improve the article.
Comment I'm going to improve the article with all the other sources that I cited in this discussion in the next couple days, they are a mix of dissertations, thesis and articles talking about the game.
MCarlos (
talk)
18:06, 20 October 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep as for verifiable sources
the game was cited in a thesis publication for the
Minas Gerais university
I did not add it to the main article, because I can read very little Portuguese (page 5 ref. 10)
the main problem with the game is that it's not an US-centric game about a niche thematic coming from a marginalized community, but it's still a valid addition
another factor to consider in matters of
WP:GNG, this game is a non-profit project in a for-profit world, they won't get a massive coverage because they aren't looking for money or clients, I see that a very aggressive point to make when the original author isn't looking for money or publicity, the coverage they got was mostly people going out of their way to feature the project, not because they were being paid to do it
MCarlos (
talk)
16:05, 20 October 2021 (UTC)reply
That's unfortunate, but, if a subject won't get much coverage because it is small and it's niche, then why does it need a Wikipedia article about it? If sources won't cover it because it's niche, why does that mean that we must cover it instead?
BUTITEXISTS. The existence of a subject
does not mean it is notable.
WhoAteMyButter (
📨talk│
📝contribs)
03:11, 22 October 2021 (UTC)reply
yes, this is a new game and it's even under development still, it won't get a lot of coverage
I'm sorry, but not every game needs to be reviewed by some AAA newspaper, specially when they are niche and indie and specially when they are from marginalized groups
my plan was to write articles for all of the games listed in
Melbourne Queer Games Festival, but I haven't played many of them, but if I have to find a big newspaper article for each of them, it's a pointless task, since many of them are by small indie developers, not by some studio that gets news coverage
MCarlos (
talk)
12:24, 20 October 2021 (UTC)reply
Hi, for a response to that please see
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. As for your argument that "it won't get a lot of coverage", see
WP:TOOSOON. Once it gets a lot of coverage, it's fine to appear on Wikipedia, but Wikipedia is NOT an advertising platform to assist in getting that coverage if it doesn't already have it, nor is it an advocacy platform for any specific group (
WP:NOTADVOCACY). ZXCVBNM (
TALK)17:30, 20 October 2021 (UTC)reply
I'm not trying to use those two arguments as my base for anything, my point was that, there are weaker articles that are citing there just because people dropped a bunch of sources and nothing else in projects that were for-profit and nobody batted an eye, see my other thread in the discussion so you can see the game has the coverage in other languages, the problem is that for this discussion people will only consider valid English sources
the game has been cited more than once in Brazilian universities thesis and dissertations, but I don't speak Portuguese, I made the article in English because it's the language I speak
MCarlos (
talk)
17:44, 20 October 2021 (UTC)reply
That is untrue, people absolutely will consider other language sources. I have used Japanese and European sources fairly often to prove notability. If you have found sources in Portugese then they are very much presentable as evidence. That said, with the dearth of coverage in the gaming press, they'd probably have to be fairly significant and numerous, which seems unlikely.
More likely this is an example of
WP:TOOSOON and we are better off waiting for the game's release. There is
WP:NORUSH to make an article about it.
It's most likely "nobody batted an eye" simply because no eyes were on the article in the first place. Anyone can make an article, and not everyone checks what articles have been made daily for non-notable ones, there are way too few people for that.ZXCVBNM (
TALK)18:01, 20 October 2021 (UTC)reply
the problem is that I don't speak Portuguese and I don't want to rely in stuff like google translate to extract the information, since they are thesis and dissertations with overly technical language
MCarlos (
talk)
18:08, 20 October 2021 (UTC)reply
If you are unsure about that, then it is probably a better idea to wait until there are sufficient English language sources. I am not fluent in Portugese either, but simply being cited is not the same as a dissertation written about the subject. ZXCVBNM (
TALK)18:22, 20 October 2021 (UTC)reply
I know because dissertation have English abstracts and they popup right away in google, the dissertations are about LGTB topics in video games for a gender studies dissertation and a data algorithms dissertation, and the citations link to the game devlog that it's in English more or less, explaining what's being written in the dissertation, I posted all that in a previous comment in the discussion
MCarlos (
talk)
18:31, 20 October 2021 (UTC)reply
The current sources do not indicate notability as they are either self-published (such as an inteview), not reliable (such as a fan-wiki), or not significant coverage (like a listing for something). Searching for sources does not bring any that meet
WP:V or
WP:RS. Article fails
WP:GNG and the summary of
WP:NGAME.
WhoAteMyButter (
📨talk│
📝contribs)
02:34, 31 October 2021 (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.
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.
Fails
GNG and
NRVE. Current sources do not indicate notability, and a search for sources gives either mirrors of the MQGF, or passing mentions. Kotaku article may be the only thing that can be a reliable source, but I am unsure of its significant coverage; it does say the game exists, but only in one paragraph. It was given one Bronze award from a games festival.
The significant coverage is self-published, from the author. Aside from a mention of the game in commentary, the questions themselves do not establish significance.
✘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}}.
Comment I added extra sources to the main article, some extra information from said sources,including the dissertations where the game was cited and featured,I'm doing my best since I don't speak portuguese, I'll add some extra information when I have the time to improve the article.
Comment I'm going to improve the article with all the other sources that I cited in this discussion in the next couple days, they are a mix of dissertations, thesis and articles talking about the game.
MCarlos (
talk)
18:06, 20 October 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep as for verifiable sources
the game was cited in a thesis publication for the
Minas Gerais university
I did not add it to the main article, because I can read very little Portuguese (page 5 ref. 10)
the main problem with the game is that it's not an US-centric game about a niche thematic coming from a marginalized community, but it's still a valid addition
another factor to consider in matters of
WP:GNG, this game is a non-profit project in a for-profit world, they won't get a massive coverage because they aren't looking for money or clients, I see that a very aggressive point to make when the original author isn't looking for money or publicity, the coverage they got was mostly people going out of their way to feature the project, not because they were being paid to do it
MCarlos (
talk)
16:05, 20 October 2021 (UTC)reply
That's unfortunate, but, if a subject won't get much coverage because it is small and it's niche, then why does it need a Wikipedia article about it? If sources won't cover it because it's niche, why does that mean that we must cover it instead?
BUTITEXISTS. The existence of a subject
does not mean it is notable.
WhoAteMyButter (
📨talk│
📝contribs)
03:11, 22 October 2021 (UTC)reply
yes, this is a new game and it's even under development still, it won't get a lot of coverage
I'm sorry, but not every game needs to be reviewed by some AAA newspaper, specially when they are niche and indie and specially when they are from marginalized groups
my plan was to write articles for all of the games listed in
Melbourne Queer Games Festival, but I haven't played many of them, but if I have to find a big newspaper article for each of them, it's a pointless task, since many of them are by small indie developers, not by some studio that gets news coverage
MCarlos (
talk)
12:24, 20 October 2021 (UTC)reply
Hi, for a response to that please see
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. As for your argument that "it won't get a lot of coverage", see
WP:TOOSOON. Once it gets a lot of coverage, it's fine to appear on Wikipedia, but Wikipedia is NOT an advertising platform to assist in getting that coverage if it doesn't already have it, nor is it an advocacy platform for any specific group (
WP:NOTADVOCACY). ZXCVBNM (
TALK)17:30, 20 October 2021 (UTC)reply
I'm not trying to use those two arguments as my base for anything, my point was that, there are weaker articles that are citing there just because people dropped a bunch of sources and nothing else in projects that were for-profit and nobody batted an eye, see my other thread in the discussion so you can see the game has the coverage in other languages, the problem is that for this discussion people will only consider valid English sources
the game has been cited more than once in Brazilian universities thesis and dissertations, but I don't speak Portuguese, I made the article in English because it's the language I speak
MCarlos (
talk)
17:44, 20 October 2021 (UTC)reply
That is untrue, people absolutely will consider other language sources. I have used Japanese and European sources fairly often to prove notability. If you have found sources in Portugese then they are very much presentable as evidence. That said, with the dearth of coverage in the gaming press, they'd probably have to be fairly significant and numerous, which seems unlikely.
More likely this is an example of
WP:TOOSOON and we are better off waiting for the game's release. There is
WP:NORUSH to make an article about it.
It's most likely "nobody batted an eye" simply because no eyes were on the article in the first place. Anyone can make an article, and not everyone checks what articles have been made daily for non-notable ones, there are way too few people for that.ZXCVBNM (
TALK)18:01, 20 October 2021 (UTC)reply
the problem is that I don't speak Portuguese and I don't want to rely in stuff like google translate to extract the information, since they are thesis and dissertations with overly technical language
MCarlos (
talk)
18:08, 20 October 2021 (UTC)reply
If you are unsure about that, then it is probably a better idea to wait until there are sufficient English language sources. I am not fluent in Portugese either, but simply being cited is not the same as a dissertation written about the subject. ZXCVBNM (
TALK)18:22, 20 October 2021 (UTC)reply
I know because dissertation have English abstracts and they popup right away in google, the dissertations are about LGTB topics in video games for a gender studies dissertation and a data algorithms dissertation, and the citations link to the game devlog that it's in English more or less, explaining what's being written in the dissertation, I posted all that in a previous comment in the discussion
MCarlos (
talk)
18:31, 20 October 2021 (UTC)reply
The current sources do not indicate notability as they are either self-published (such as an inteview), not reliable (such as a fan-wiki), or not significant coverage (like a listing for something). Searching for sources does not bring any that meet
WP:V or
WP:RS. Article fails
WP:GNG and the summary of
WP:NGAME.
WhoAteMyButter (
📨talk│
📝contribs)
02:34, 31 October 2021 (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.