Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Society (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 keep. (non-admin closure) Satellizer (´ ･ ω ･ `) 00:23, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Society (video game)

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

It seems that this article does not meet the notability requirements. This game was said to be in development in 2011, but apparently has not been released (yet). Fred Johansen (talk) 13:08, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ Keep. ~~Doesn't meet notability guidelines;~~ unable to locate any reliable sources talking about this topic. Obviously didn't look hard enough initially. Was able to locate reliable sources talking about it. APerson (talk!) 14:01, 13 January 2015 (UTC); edited 00:18, 14 January 2015 (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) 14:27, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:27, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I'm unsure of the stances above are due to confusion on notability criteria, or a failure of WP:BEFORE, but there is definitely significant coverage from multiple, third party, reliable sources on the subject, which is what the WP:GNG requires. Below are sources that cover it in detail, and have a consensus for being reliable by WikiProject Video Games at WP:VG/S:

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/society-e3-2005-impressions/1100-6126078/
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/stardock-announces-society/1100-6125372/
http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/society/614757p1.html
http://www.ign.com/articles/2005/05/20/e3-2005-society-first-look

Being in development hell or being cancelled is not a valid criteria for deletion, so I really don't follow any deletion stances... Sergecross73 msg me 14:38, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Stardock#History. This situation is analogous to Wikipedia:Notability (films)#Future films, incomplete films, and undistributed films - Society has not exited pre-production, and at this point it's not reasonable to assume that it will. The 2011 post said that Stardock now had the technology to create it; in three years, they haven't. However, we should keep referenced information. GreenReaper (talk) 14:56, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Commment - I've rewritten the article out of stub status, with a bunch of reliable sources. There's a lot of info out there. This is much more comparable to StarCraft: Ghost (a Featured Article), than say, Austin Powers 4. Sergecross73 msg me 17:08, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: GameSpy and IGN are both reliable sources according to WP:VG/RS, and the first of the two GameSpot references is written by the staff, so it's also fine. Not a lot there, but still enough to have its own article. Supernerd11 _{Firemind ^_^ Pokedex} 17:51, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Significant coverage and passes notability requirements. Ethically^Yours! 12:35, 20 January 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.