Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Build-A-Bear Workshop (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. It's WP:SNOWing. Mgm|^(talk) 22:24, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Build-A-Bear Workshop (video game)

Article has lacked any sources whatsoever for the several years it has existed, and no reliable third party sources could be found when I search. Clearly fails any notion of verifiability or notability. Steven Walling (talk) 01:58, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Trim and Merge with Build-A-Bear Workshop, likely notable as it is a published, licensed game for Nintendo DS, but I couldn't find any non-trivial third party coverage for it to stand on its own. -Senseless!... says you, says me 02:02, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - It seems to have won an award [1][2][3], and is a "traditional favorite" for the Nintendo [4]. If that's not convincing, I'd be ok with a merge to Build-A-Bear Workshop — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 05:56, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There's sources, see Gamerankings' page (some of the reviews listed are undesirable, but the likes of GameZone are good), hands-on preview from GameSpot, piece on pocket gamer. As a general note, if anyone comes across a video game article and is struggling to find reliable sources they are very welcome to bring the video game project's attention to the article, we've got a lot of experience in digging out sources. Someone another 11:42, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. Someone another 11:45, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep –notability is established quite easily. It could be merged to Build a Bear Workshop to make a more complete article, but as far as this AFD is concerned, deletion is right out. MuZemike 13:05, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As lame as this looks, it's sold over half a million copies, which makes it a substantial hit by video game standards. Lots of professional reviews and other sources. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 16:22, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Clearly notable per above sources. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 20:00, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Someone should probably SNOW close as Keep. Steven Walling (talk) 20:41, 8 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.