- 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. The Bushranger One ping only 06:11, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Project Nova (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable unreleased video game with no sources that can be found to satisfy WP:GNG. Fails WP:CRYSTAL. – Richard BB 00:28, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Contested double-prod per "Non-notable unreleased video game with no sources that I can find to satisfy WP:GNG. Fails WP:CRYSTAL." — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 08:19, 29 October 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, — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 09:15, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I just realized this wasn't listed in AfD log. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 09:15, 9 November 2011 (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) 15:09, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:10, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Definitely not notable. -Vaarsivius (Talk to me.) 15:13, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Fails WP:CRYSTAL, virtually nothing is known about it, it doesn't even have a proper title, etc. Sergecross73 msg me 15:15, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Article is unsourced, with no proof of notability. The game is unreleased and, as is perhaps the one thing the article successfully manages to show, next-to-nothing is known about it. No real reason to keep it. Hammerbrodude (talk) 20:15, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as lacking in-depth coverage from independent reliable third party sources. Stuartyeates (talk) 06:47, 15 November 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.