Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Fields of Mistria - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Liz (talk | contribs) at 07:53, 30 August 2024 (→Fields of Mistria: Closed as keep (XFDcloser)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

Revision as of 07:53, 30 August 2024 by Liz (talk | contribs) (→Fields of Mistria: Closed as keep (XFDcloser))(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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. Liz 07:53, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Fields of Mistria

Not a voteIf you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Misplaced Pages contributors. Misplaced Pages has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Fields of Mistria (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'll fully admit this is on the edge, but the main sources used here, TechRaptor and Noisy Pixel are essentially unreliable. The game only got 2 major reviews from RS, one from PCGamer and the other from The Escapist, and while it got numerous pieces of coverage from PCGamer, that counts as a single source as far as GNG is concerned. The other mentions the game had, such as in Kotaku, are just trivial coverage of announcements and don't include actual reviews of the game, leaving the amount of significant coverage below the bar for a typical game article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:41, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

  • (article creator) Keep or draftify I've removed Noisy Pixel from the article, considering that most other sources mention same things as them, and added recent RS. TechRaptor, on the other hand, is not listed as an unreliable source, unlike Noisy Pixel. The game has actually been reviewed beyond PCGamer and The Escapist, though they might not be as detailed as those two sources. The amount of coverage it received though, especially for an indie early access game from an unknown studio, is enough to meet WP:GNG standards. If editors think the opposite, I feel like the article should then at least be draftified because it will probably continue getting coverage from RS in the coming period (the game was just released in early access last week), after which the article will certainly be ready for mainspace, if it is not ready now. I do not think that straight up deleting the article will be helpful, considering that it will certainly then be re-created at some point in the future. --Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 10:20, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
    In the 4 discussions on the site, it was struck out as Unreliable. I'm actually not sure why it's listed as inconclusive. But if people decide otherwise here, I'll gladly withdraw the AfD.
    The game is early access, so you could be right about the WP:TOOSOON. I still think that merits deletion rather than draftification. This is a case where the page should be saved locally until such time it can be rewritten. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:51, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
    I very much disagree, but I'd like to hear opinions from other editors. The game has received better or same coverage as other games listed at Upcoming video games scheduled for 2025. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 11:19, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
  • Draftify: As someone who planned to create this article, this game is likely to be notable within the next six months (when drafts get deleted after 6 months of no activity) because the game was just released into early access this month. Currently, Metacritic shows just two reviews, both of which are unreliable. Plus two sources is just under what makes a topic notable and its only been a week since launch (I normally say at least three reliable sources). You can see why I didn't publish it rn but planned to work on it by end of month. The article is much larger than expected also. I have a draft sitting in my userspace about this game JuniperChill (talk) 11:13, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete or ATD to Draftify: It is Too Soon to "Keep". Misplaced Pages is not a crystal ball. Would not be against draftifying (ATD) if consensus agrees there might be more than bare notability of a Stardew Valley knock-off in the near future. -- Otr500 (talk) 13:03, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep or at worst Draftify. Disclaimer that I came here after the creator asked for feedback on the quality of the article in the Misplaced Pages VG project discord. That said, I find the assertion "TechRaptor is unreliable" to be a bit of bunk as it's recognized as inconclusive by WP:VG/S and just had a recent discussion to that end. There are also several other sources independently discussing the subject's early access release such as Siliconera and Destructoid. Probably one concern is WP:SUSTAINED as many of the sources are in a small window of time, but there's at least enough reaction to indicate a degree of notability from it's Early Access release. The absolute worse case is if it fizzles beyond this it can be revisited later.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 12:51, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
    There isn't really an argument why "inconclusive" should be counted as reliable. That means "possibly unreliable" and we should only use sources that are confirmed to have full reliability. There are plenty of games with numerous reliable source articles. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:42, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
    Zx I'm not even going to entertain that argument, you've been with the project long enough to know that's not how that works.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 00:44, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
  • Oppose deletion. Not voting keep because I haven't looked into the sources fully. I don't think there's any reasonable grounds for deletion here - the game has only just released to early access and we already have enough coverage to write a 1000+-word article on it. If it doesn't yet belong in mainspace, the appropriate action is to draftify it. -- asilvering (talk) 16:55, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I don't see a consensus here yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz 23:12, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

  • Keep or Draftify: I voted on Keep or Draftify because the unreliable sources can be change and find anotehr source that are reliable, Although, WP:TOOSOON can be applied here but it was released on Early access on August 5, 2024. I check earlier and TechRaptor and Noisy Pixel are gone on references so that's good. But the article was concisely citated on reliable sources.
I say Draftify because it was so early to create this but since it was on Early Access (i don't see where is in early access) on Steam, I think it is good that is in mainspace now. Royiswariii (talk) 13:01, 25 August 2024 (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.