Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Atomic Betty (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. Valley2city^‽ 07:18, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Atomic Betty (video game)

Does not seem to meet notability guidelines, as notability is not inherited from the main topic. Also, article reads like an advertisement. BlueSquadronRaven 20:20, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. BlueSquadronRaven 20:22, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but cleanup. Game for a major console from a major publisher with multiple major sources. TJ Spyke 21:15, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources such as? I can't see that every title by a major publisher for a major console is notable in and of itself. I'm just trying to understand the rationale. --BlueSquadronRaven 21:20, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Looking at the links in the article to IGN and GameSpot, there is plenty of independent coverage there and from reliable secondary sources. Notability is easily established. The reason why the article read like an advertisement is that because the second paragraph was a copyvio of the IGN synopsis at [1] I have removed that paragraph as shown here. MuZemike 21:35, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Atomic Betty is the way to go 83.251.131.118 (talk) 21:57, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Did you look for sources? Two of the external links there lead to misc. articles that can be used to establish notability and they've been they've been there since 2007. Game Rankings lists some usable reviews and GameZone has a decent sized review, there's previews on IGN, GameSpot and 1up. Someone another 22:53, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment MuZemike removed a copyvio and I threw together a basic reception section and cited some sources. So now, with that raccoon's help, I'll give myself a prrrrrrrrromotion. Someone another 16:17, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A game released for a major platform with reliable sources. I strongly suggest NOT to merge as the game has enough information to necessitate a separate article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kagetto (talk • contribs) 17:50, 17 April 2009 (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.