Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Last Odyssey: Pinball Fantasia

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 delete. bibliomaniac 1 5 06:39, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Last Odyssey: Pinball Fantasia

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Cancelled video game that does not meet the notability guidelines. Nearly all the sources on here are unreliable or dubious in nature, consisting primarily of a YouTube video by a non-notable figure or questionable fansites. There's also no reception, which is a requirement for cancelled video game articles. Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 22:08, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:16, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:16, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This will be my only comment on this subject but its a notable unreleased Neo Geo title, regardless of its sources. Also, finding even the slightest of reviews about x unreleased game its tough because nobody bothered to keep track of it back in the day and compiled them for easy net searching. I'm fairly certain this won't be the last unreleased Neo Geo game article i created targeted for deletion, which is disheartening due to the time i invested on them. Although somebody may had already archived the links, which is the least of worries now (since pretty much everybody these days archive links for future reference). Roberth Martinez (talk) 13:44, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"a notable unreleased Neo Geo title, regardless of its sources" - that doesn't make any sense. If there's nothing in the way of reliability in the sources, then this shouldn't even have an article. You basically admitted that this article isn't notable but it should stay anyway, which is silly. Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 16:45, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I didn't admit that the article was not notable. I said blatantly that it was a notable unreleased Neo Geo title but whatever suits your mind. There ARE sources about LO:PF but they're extremely hard to come by. That and i'm currently dealing with internet issues at my home (i'm responding via mobile device) than to look for sources, which i seriously need to get it fixed. Roberth Martinez (talk) 17:53, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

But how is it notable? Is there significant coverage of this game in reliable, third-party publications? Assuming that sources exist is not at all a reason to keep something, as really that applies to basically everything. If there's no coverage of this by reliable sources, then it simply cannot have an article. Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 16:10, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, passes WP:GNG, although in Japanese this source here, shows that is has been published in a reliable independent 3rd party publisher. Mr. Apollo (talk to me bebe) 12:50, 24 April 2020 (UTC) – Apollo825 (talk · contribs) is blocked as a sockpuppet[reply]

How can you look at this article and think it is notable? Most of the sources are unreliable, and the ones that aren't offer almost no significant coverage. I fail to see why this pagevshould be kept. Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 13:52, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The "NeoGeoFreak" coverage looks solid — I can't read Japanese, but it's clearly a two-page article entirely about the game. I also added a small reference from GamesTech magazine. — Toughpigs (talk) 20:11, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- You're proposing this article be kept because of one magazine? For real? Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 20:17, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The NeoGeoFreak and GamesTech coverage are significant coverage in reliable sources. So it passes the general notability guidelines. Dream Focus 22:59, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- The GamesTech coverage is literally a couple of sentences. That's not even close to establishing notability. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 23:31, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Being in a language I couldn't read I didn't look too closely at that one. Anyway, there was surely more coverage back then, not everything can be found online. This a major game from a big company, so some would be covering it. If one major media source gave it an ample review, then someone else sure did as well. Dream Focus 02:34, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - "This a major game from a big company, so some would be covering it." Who would that be? Are you confusing them with Monolith Soft? Whatever the case, saying "oh there's probably sources online" is not a valid argument to keep something. There's nothing here that has given significant coverage except for a single issue of Neo Geo Freak. One sources doesn't constitute notability. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 02:50, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      - The Neo Geo (system) had only 156 games ever released for it over its 7 year lifespan. Any monthly publication that reviewed their games would run out of things to review if they didn't cover all of them. And this company had other notable games(EDIT to Clarify: click "Developers in infobox to reveal it worked on them). Fatal_Fury_Special#Reception, Samurai_Shodown_(1993_video_game)#Reception, and Super_Baseball_2020#Reception are three other games by them that have articles, and they had ample coverage. Unless someone has a copy of those old magazines from back then and wants to bother looking it up and posting information, no way to tell. But I find it unlikely they wouldn't have reviewed this game in more than one place. Dream Focus 03:29, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        This game is a cancelled game, so there are never going be reviews of any kind. You meant previews? Jovanmilic97 (talk) 08:54, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        
        All of the examples are games by SNK, a clearly notable developer. I really don't know what you're trying to argue about here. This article clearly doesn't meet the notability guidelines and I fail to see how you think otherwise. We cannot be assuming things with sources, and if we can't find any, what good does keeping this article have? Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 03:32, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        
        Comment There ARE rare ocurrences where a cancelled game DID get reviews. An example of this is The Shadow by Ocean Software. Most of them were found by SNESCentral, while the Next Generation review was found by BOZ, however the Micromania review was found by complete accident during one of my researchs. So IMHO, if there are reviews for a unreleased title then go for it. Otherwise, I don't see the reception section as a necessity for a cancelled title and I never intend to invent a reception section for the sake of one in a article about an unreleased title, as finding references for cancelled games is much harder than for a game that did get released. Oh and one more thing, if any magazine giving his thoughts about the title is shown, then that's also valid. Roberth Martinez (talk) 15:38, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        You still haven't proven why this article meets the notability criteria despite me asking multiple times. I'd be very surprised if an admin closed this discussion as "Keep" after looking at the page itself, which has four sources (only one of which being actually useful, the Neo Geo Freak coverage) and lots of unverified statements. Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 16:45, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        Comment All I'll say after this comment is this: It's a notable unreleased title among Neo Geo fans but finding sources that covered the game (like Gamest and Micom BASIC Magazine for example) are extremely brutal to come by. Finding what I digged out for The Warlocks of the Fates prior to being deleted (unfairly IMO) was NOT easy, especially since I was dealing with serious internet issues at my home during the time when that happened. Want another example of a cancelled game without a reception section? Well, there's Sonic X-Treme. I can prove the notability of a game here on Wikipedia but as I said before, finding sources for a canned title is HARD. Roberth Martinez (talk) 17:49, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        It's not notable if you can't establish notability. That ignores WP:GNG. Sonic X-Treme has also seen significant retrospective coverage (and even some reception), so I am clueless as to why you're trying to make the comparison between that game and this. If sources don't cover this in detail, then it cannot possibly have an article on Wikipedia. Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 18:32, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        The General Notability Guidelines clearly state in the disclaimer at the top This page documents an English Wikipedia notability guideline. It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply. It is not an absolute law like Policies are. Dream Focus 18:50, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        One source does not establish notability. Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 19:17, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        Others have already stated that they felt there would be more and why it wouldn't be practical to find them. Mentions elsewhere, no matter how brief, add to the notability claim. You have stated you opinion several times, others have stated theirs. Dream Focus 20:04, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        I've stated it multiple times because almost nobody here seems to understand the notability policy. Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 20:30, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        The notability guideline. It is not a policy. And we understand it just fine. Dream Focus 20:34, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        Please, take this talk to a talk page or whatever, both of you. It is WP:BLUDGEON-ing the discussion right now. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 20:40, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Sigh. This is a messy AfD here. Not sure what is worse here, "but its a notable unreleased Neo Geo title, regardless of its sources" that ignores WP:GNG, linking a website that has nothing to do with the game, 1 source = notability, and mistaking the developer of the game initially for Monolith Soft (Japanese company that opened in 1999, four years after the cancellation of the game), and even SNK (!). At this point, this has 0 chances to be closed anything other than keep/no consensus, so I am not voting. I saw one of the Game Machine references through archives shared by my friend, which is merely an announcement of the game, GamesTech just says that it's a cancelled pinball game by Monolith Corp., CD Consolas says "Monolith is creating a heroic fantasy atmosphere for this pinball game title for Neo Geo. Twelve courses and many tables are planned. The story takes a knight to fight an armada of monsters to finally confront him with the king of demons." which I don't find a significant coverage, and that leaves a (great) Neo Geo Freak reference that did preview the game. Sadly, as the one and only source like it (and me being unable to find anything else even by searching in Japanese), it fails WP:GNG. Not that anything I said here matters now. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 08:47, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Namcokid's analysis is correct; there simply aren't enough sources to demonstrate notability. JOE BRO 64 23:33, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per Namcokid and Jovanmilic97's commentary. Although Jovan did not explicitly !vote, his analysis is spot on. -- ferret (talk) 23:43, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Absolutely poor arguments by the people who voted Keep - show me significant coverage. A source is nice. It's worth a mention somewhere in the encyclopedia, perhaps in a list article like List of Neo Geo games, acknowledging the existence of its development and that it was cancelled. Its own article? That is not appropriate coverage. Full disclosure, since it was mentioned above: I am the primary author of Sonic X-treme. I have experience working with cancelled video game articles. Red Phoenix ^talk 00:17, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. Woodroar (talk) 00:30, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - subject does not meet the GNG. These sources are obscure and the ones we can check are not significant coverage. Cancelled video games can be notable - I’ve created and maintained a few. This is not how it’s done though. Sergecross73 msg me 01:24, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- There's plenty of articles on cancelled video games that are comprehensive and notable (heck, I made one just a few hours ago). It's not like having pages for cancelled video games is not allowed, it's that they need to be notable to have their own article. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 01:28, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - I completely agree. But some editors (mistakenly) believe being unreleased is an auto-delete situation. Just clarifying I don’t subscribe to that at all...and still think this should be deleted. Sergecross73 msg me 01:53, 26 April 2020 (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.