Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Famiclone

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. I'm nipping this in the bud. Multiple bad AFDs opened in rapid succession by a just unblocked editor. None of these are going to result in a delete or merge. -- ferret (talk) 13:49, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Famiclone

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Famiclone (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Has very little notable stuff in it, better to merge it to the main NES article. A lot of cruft that few people in the general public that the encyclopedia serves would be interested in it. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 03:29, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The nominator's statement suggests that they're attempting to open a merge request, for which AfD is not a proper venue. Apart from this, a deletion discussion is closed based on a determination of the notability of the subject, not whether it is interesting; there are somewhere north of a hundred sources here which seem to militate against deletion. jp×g 08:42, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, GNG —siroχo 09:27, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This article has 122 citations, many of them from reliable sources both domestic and international, with quite a few of them talking about the decades-long history of Famiclones at length. It is very clearly notable. FlotillaFlotsam (talk) 11:39, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Clearly notable and GNG passing article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:57, 29 July 2023 (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.