Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ReCharge Collectible Card 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. Although the nom has withdrawn I can't really close as SK/Withdrawn due to the delete !vote present, Anyway sources have been provided which everyone' happy with so am closing as Keep (non-admin closure) –Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 23:50, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ReCharge Collectible Card Game

ReCharge Collectible Card Game (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

I can't find any sources other than retailers, doesn't seem to have been very relevant anyways. Layla, the remover (talk) 13:09, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:01, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Short lived failed card game with basically zero coverage. TimothyJosephWood 15:19, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Failed, unnotable game. I can't find any real sources for it that talk about it in any depth, and the only links provided in the current article are defunct. 64.183.45.226 (talk) 20:57, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Changing vote to Keep per the sources provided by Odie5533 below. Nice work! 64.183.45.226 (talk) 19:08, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Redirect to List of collectible card games. I found this reliable review about the game (link is only the beginning of the article, rest was published in the magazine). It seems likely to me that CCG mags (InQuest, Scrye) from 2001 ran articles about the game, materials which aren't currently digitized. Previews did run features about the game back in 2002, but I'm not sure if they were all just solicitations or also articles/reviews. --Odie5533 (talk) 14:31, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

After doing some searching on Archive.org I am changing my recommendation to Keep. Here is a very detailed article by ICv2 on the game. Here is an advance review of the game by author and comic writer Eric J. Moreels written for the Cinescape Magazine website. And here is evidence that Scrye (#8.7, October 2001) ran an "in-depth analysis of the game" and here is evidence that Scrye 8.8 ran an article on the game too. The Cinescape Magazine website also has many other long articles written about the game. I believe the game meets WP:GNG. --Odie5533 (talk) 16:08, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Odie5533. BOZ (talk) 13:08, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Great job, you found some life saving things for the article! I didn't think anything could be found, good job. Layla, the remover (talk) 13:23, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Layla, the remover, would a keep from the nominator be the same as a withdraw?  :) BOZ (talk) 06:53, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Odie5533. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 02:49, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BOZ Yes. Layla, the remover (talk) 12:57, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@BOZ and Layla, the remover: A 'delete' opinion is supported and hence withdrawing is not applicable. --Mhhossein ^talk 18:40, 20 December 2016 (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.