Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cobalt (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. Snow closure. Deletion concerns appear to have been addressed. (non-admin closure) Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 03:27, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cobalt (video game)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable upcoming video game. Mythpage88 (talk) 07:23, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I'm sure this game is notable, it's also the second result in Google for "Cobalt". l'll find some sources for it, and it's not exactly "upcoming" if it's in playable alpha. Wagner ^u t c 07:46, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WP:GOOGLEHITS. Mythpage88 (talk) 07:52, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This game actually gained a LOT of interest from articles posted by Mojang (The guys who made Minecraft), and by many Youtubers and Bloggers. Just search "Cobalt" on Youtube. ----* Alan.comek - [ Talk • Contribs ] 15:47, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Those aren't reliable sources in the slightest. Mythpage88 (talk) 17:04, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean not reliable? Thousands of people read and watch that stuff every day. Yes, there are more reliable sources out there, but who says that this isn't? ----* Alan.comek - [ Talk • Contribs ] 04:59, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Our guidelines do -- WP:RS. See the links below as to what reliable VG sources (WP:VG/RS) are. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 11:04, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

HellKnowz is correct. See my post below for a list of articles for on the game that are considered reliable. Sergecross73 msg me 13:47, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 12:40, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:40, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Coverage in reliable, third party sources, to establish notability. Source list:
Keep: Per Sergecross. SL93 (talk) 23:44, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and add the sources listed above to the article. Multiple independent RS'es meet the GNG. Jclemens (talk) 00:19, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The game was released, although it is in the Alpha stage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexkill51 (talk • contribs) 20:37, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Passes GNG. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 13:05, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It will be mentioned at upcoming 2012 PAX. Wilsonlu (talk) 06:01, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CRYSTALBALL Mythpage88 (talk) 18:20, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there are several "Keep" !votes here that are for the wrong reasons, like that one, or the one about Google hits, but ultimately what matters here is that it is getting plenty of coverage in third party sources, as I listed above, and should be kept for that reason. Sergecross73 msg me 18:42, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It gets coverage. Remember to use the custom Google search for video games sources. [1] Makes it easy to find things. Dream Focus 12:51, 9 February 2012 (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.