Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OTON X Console

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 Speedily deleted (G11); the concerns about notability and WP:CRYSTAL are valid, but the article right now was nothing but a press/release ad for a nonexistent product. — Coren ^(talk) 19:24, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OTON X Console

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

WP:NOTABILITY. This is an unreleased console still seeking funding. One gnews hit. A few other commentaries can be found casting doubts on the console matching its hype; that wouldn't seem to contribute to true notability. Nat Gertler (talk) 05:06, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a scam (and probably is) because capabilities of console seem far too unrealistic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.238.61.28 (talk) 13:02, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just because something might exist doesn't mean it's Wikipedia worthy yet. All that exists thus far is a Youtube video and a website. Agree with the anon above me - both its hardware and software capabilities are unrealistic to its price point. Once the developers release hardware prototypes to known third party reviewers for analysis, then it can be worthy of a Wikipedia page. Once they get as well known as the current console makers, then and only then can they have Wikipedia pages in place prior to a physical release. If I design a religion and then announce it, that doesn't mean it's worthy of a Wikipedia advertisement page. You have to have a following. Admiralthrawn 1 (talk) 15:38, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Admiralthrawn, The OUYA and the WiiU had pages before they were released into the hands of people. Being that the creator of the console had created other consoles that saw the light of day in the past, and I as an investor in the OUYA have yet to see a console, I don't see why this shouldn't be on Wikipedia.

Nat, there are many articles coming out this week on the unit. The same commentaries could have been said about the OUYA, which as said earlier, hasn't been released. How do I know? Because I bought one and it doesn't ship until March (Unless you're a developer, which your unit gets here this month). I don't see my liking of game consoles in general to be a conflict of interest. I own many consoles and study the history of them in my spare time. Unlike your COI with Charles Shultz's Peanuts, I have not made any money off of this product or any other product. This is merely a hobby of mine and I'm sharing information for those that are interested. This was never meant to be any sort of an advertisement. [1]User:3vix6 (talk) 08:56, 6 December 2012 (MST)

I am in no way ruling out this future device becoming notable in the future. Arguments about whether OUYA should have a page would belong on that page's talk page; the fact that something else currently has a page does not mean that this one should, as there are plenty of pages on Wikipedia that should be deleted for lack of notability. No one has claimed that you liking consoles in general is a conflict of interest; you yourself have stated in an edit summary "I actually am working with the creator and have been for better than a year to bring the console to light." That is a statement well beyond liking a category of things. (And when you claim your interest merely as a hobby, you have also described yourself as an investor in another console.) --Nat Gertler (talk) 17:33, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTABILITY, WP:COI, reads like an advertisement, and if you Google "OTON X", the first result is a NeoGAF thread about this being a scam. Ezhuks (talk) 18:29, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"the fact that something else currently has a page does not mean that this one should" --> OK, please remind me of who made you king of the world? Last time I checked there are other people on Wikipedia than yourself. I'm sure I can find plenty of things that you're biased towards on all of your posts.

Delete it if you want Nat, I just was passing information that I had on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 3vix6 (talk • contribs) 19:12, 5 December 2012 (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.