Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/5 Days a Stranger

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.--Kchase T 06:04, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No reliable source to support notability. Fails WP:SOFTWARE. Andre (talk) 22:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete because of absence of sources, NOT because it fails WP:SOFTWARE, which is not policy or guideline. Voretus^talk 16:31, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - it has been featured in various gaming magazines, though I couldn't name any besides the UK PC Gamer offhand. And a lack of sources is not a good reason to remove an article. BovineBeast 17:26, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • One gaming magazine is not enough to prove notability and importance. Andre (talk) 21:22, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Notability and importance are subjective. And it's been mentioned in more than one gaming magazine, I'm sure, since it's reasonably famous, it's just that I can only name one. Plus, Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia. There's no reason we can't have these articles, just because you haven't heard of their topics. BovineBeast 12:09, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Why don't we delete Facade Computer as well, Andre? It's only been featured in the New York Times, and one newspaper is not enough to prove notability and importance, as you say. --81.79.29.103 01:04, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Fairly well known and has been featured in a number of publications. Jefffire 14:07, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The article does not establish the notability of the subject. For the purposes of Wikipedia, notability is not subjecive. Regarding "a lack of sources is not a good reason to delete an article" -- lack of reliable sources is a perfect reason to delete an article. It is not possible to write a proper encyclopedia article that complies with Wikipedia content policies without basing it on what has been written in multiple, independent, reliable sources. Multiple independent sources have been provided, changing to Neutral-- Chondrite 19:10, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep added 5 references to reviews/awards of the game to the article --Amaccormack 13:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep a multiple AGS award winner [1] 195.114.94.194 23:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as referenced.--Kubigula (talk) 01:55, 13 December 2006 (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.