Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paranormal (video game)

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 14:22, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Paranormal (video game)

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

Article is completely unsourced, makes no claim to importance and appears to be for a non-notable game lacking coverage from reliable sources. The only external link provided is to the game's download page and a video by Pewdiepie is stated to be its only "indicator" of notability. RPGMakerMan (talk) 05:02, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The rather generic title of the game makes it difficult to search for sources, but I have found none that were not just first party or from other wikis. The only claim to notability in the article is that a youtube personality played it, but that doesn't really cut it as far as passing the GNG. Rorshacma (talk) 16:58, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 00:06, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:06, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 13:26, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Ultimately this is a non-notable game at this point in time. Like Rorshacma said, searching for sources was a bit difficult but I wasn't able to find anything that would show that the game has enough notability to merit an entry. It might get more press when it eventually releases, but it doesn't have it at this point in time.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 05:04, 29 September 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.