- 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. NW (Talk) 16:26, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- ARMIS (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
"Armis" is a particularly complicated chess variant, commercially sold. The current article is an advertisement combined with the game's rules. The only references are links to a copyright search and a trademark search; the only external links are to the game's company's website, a link to a rules listing (already present in immense detail in the article), and youtube videos on how to play. This, in and of itself, is not a problem, if the article could be fixed, but I believe it can't. There's no indication anywhere, other than the game's website, that the game has made any impact or that anybody is playing the game. The lack of possible secondary sources for this subject indicates that this article should be deleted. ArglebargleIV (talk) 13:31, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- delete It is difficult to see the game has any clear novelty so I must agree with Arglebargle's points. The current WP:SPA doesn't help the case. There is an extensive promotion campaign happening on the net but it is still lacking the sites to give it credibility. Ironically this behaviour eventually might achieve its aim but it is a long way off yet.Tetron76 (talk) 15:51, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- question i was just wondering why this article is up for deletion. there are other articles about board games on Wikipedia. how is this one different, like Risk and Stratego, for example? SophiaAntonette (talk) 18:19, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Take a look at the Risk (game) article -- multiple non-trivial references. Armis doesn't have that. Risk has sold millions of copies -- Armis hasn't. -- ArglebargleIV (talk) 20:06, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:39, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment See anything about sales figures in WP:N? Anarchangel (talk) 02:05, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:29, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Great idea, and I like this - but unfortunately a listing on the US Library of Congress and the US Patent and Trademark Office don't convey notability - those just means the game exists. Good luck in getting it out there. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 05:54, 6 March 2011 (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.