Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nintendo M82

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. T. Canens (talk) 21:56, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nintendo M82

Nintendo M82 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Article topic is not the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources. (?) It had no meaningful hits in a video game reliable sources custom Google search. I'd be fine with a redirect, but @Hahnchen thought the redirect to List of Nintendo Entertainment System accessories was "half-assed". Have fun finding sources. Please {{ping}} me if you offline and non-English refs. – czar 00:24, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge - lack of sources, all content is in respect to the parent article. Sergecross73 msg me 01:27, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 02:07, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:23, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. It seems notable even without that many references. With a quick google search, it seems as though it might be a rare, collectors item. Anarchyte 12:28, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Anarchyte, Wikipedia:But there must be sources! is an argument to avoid—either sources exist (and we can write an article) or they don't (and we can't). What did you find? – czar 16:50, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. It's a highly specialized console unit and it's not surprising it doesn't have significant, reliable, in-depth, lasting (non-collector's viewpoint) coverage to satisfy WP:GNG. There are may be a couple sentences to write in the parent article from the two sources, especially since it implies there were other unit variations. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 19:27, 17 August 2015 (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.