Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cortex command
- 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. John254 00:17, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
- Cortex command (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
According to the article, an incomplete game and no indication of notability. Speedy replaced by a prod, contested by an anon IP. Blanked by the author so probably a speedy candidate. Ros0709 (talk) 20:04, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- Strong Delete per WP:N, WP:V and WP:RS --Numyht (talk) 20:16, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. and WP:CRYSTAL. Looking at the history, the author didn't actually blank it, he replaced it with the word "maladministration"; so I guess we can't use {{db-author}}. JohnCD (talk) 20:18, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:53, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- Keep but Source - Play (US magazine) wrote a 2 page article on the game and it's developer, a copy of which has been uploaded by the developer here. An interview with the developer can be found here It also featured as game of the month on Indiegames here. Hope this helps.Gazimoff WriteRead 21:12, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game related deletions. MrKIA11 (talk) 23:03, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- Keep and source per the refs dug up by Gazimoff. Ford MF (talk) 23:32, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- Keep per Gazimoff, who did the research after the nomination that would have been mandatory before the nomination. --Kizor 11:44, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
- Keep. Gazimoff knows his games, don't mess with him or he'll source you up /end jokishness. Someone add in the sources and info found by gazimoff, so there are no issues in the future. — MaggotSyn 15:10, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
- Keep if there are sources indicating its notability. MuZemike (talk) 17:49, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
- Keep The indie scene's been stunk-up with talk of this one for awhile now, print magazines don't devote two of their precious pages to interviews with developers if they're not developing something of note. Both the above sources are very reliable, the details present in both interviews are vastly superior to many future-game articles which spring up when there's nothing more than an announcement. The indie games interview is cited, I can't cite the play magazine one until I find the page numbers. Someoneanother 11:19, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, and if the result is keep, please rename it to Cortex Command. Someoneanother 11:21, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- And here's a few more mentions with at least a smidgeon of usable material: PC Format and Rock Paper Shotgun. Not only does this (IMO) already pass the notability requirement, it's being signalled that further builds/the finished product will attract much greater attention in the future. Someoneanother 13:22, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- 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.