Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kurayami
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Cirt (talk) 09:02, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Kurayami (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Deleted several times via speedy and once via prod. No sources, WP:CRYSTAL. Maybe salt. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 01:26, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MuZemike 01:29, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete doesn't yet exist, and no evidence of notability; no obvious rd candidate. JJL (talk) 01:36, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, all the information I could find on this is from 2006. There does not appear to be any current info on this game and the 2006 data says there is no release date yet. Nothing to say this is notable. A new name 2008 (talk) 01:47, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- (ec) Delete so that the next time it comes up we can use G4. ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs) 01:51, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Does this already violate G4? Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 02:19, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Nah - G4 concerns copies, "by any title, of a page deleted via a deletion discussion," which excludes, as it later comments, content that was "deleted via proposed deletion, or to speedy deletions." Essentially, G4 is only if it has already been discussed; CSD and PROD are by definition not discussions, so since this article has only been dealt with through those avenues it isn't eligible... yet. ;) ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs) 03:54, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, thanks. I'd just delete it, then, based on its lack of notability. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 16:16, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Nah - G4 concerns copies, "by any title, of a page deleted via a deletion discussion," which excludes, as it later comments, content that was "deleted via proposed deletion, or to speedy deletions." Essentially, G4 is only if it has already been discussed; CSD and PROD are by definition not discussions, so since this article has only been dealt with through those avenues it isn't eligible... yet. ;) ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs) 03:54, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Does this already violate G4? Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 02:19, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Niteshift36 (talk) 03:09, 18 June 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.