Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/You've Been Sentenced!

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 of the debate was delete with 6 delete votes and two keep votes by new contributors. moink 20:10, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] You've Been Sentenced!

Advertisement for non-notable game. Only a few hundred Google hits here, not all of which are related. The entry on BoardGameGeek has only comments by "Springheeledjack", the author of this article and McNeill Designs, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/McNeill Designs.Delete. Kusma (討論) 15:50, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. --Ezeu 16:16, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Disagree with your assessement as a "non-notable" game. As per WP:CORP Criteria for products and services:

A product or service is notable if it meets any one of the following criteria:

The product or service has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the company itself. This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, television documentaries, and published reports by consumer watchdog organizations. 7

There have been numerous newspaper, TV, and Radio stories and articles regarding this product

Your assessment of "non-notable" is incorrect. *Keep Springheeledjack 18:57, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

• • Please provide evidence by citing reliable sources. Kusma (討論) 19:29, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

• • http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060126/CROSSROADS/601260317/1006/NEWS Springheeledjack 19:36, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as advertising. At the very least, it would need extensive cleaning to remove POV.--み使い Mitsukai 19:18, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

'Delete' - Either an advertisment, or copied off of marketing materials. Would need a total rewrite to remove bias. Jaxal1 18:53, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

• Explain what you mean by "bias". This article is in line with other articles on specific boardgames. What would you suggest as a re-write? I am not connected with the company, and the content was not copied from another website, so this DOES NOT qualify as advertizing or Wikipedia:Spam according to Wikipedia rules. Springheeledjack 19:13, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
• You have already said you want to keep it. Please don't "vote" more than once. About advertising: "YBS is the first sentence building game that actually works well and has great replay value." is not neutral. Kusma (討論) 19:29, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

• Kindly provide appropriate alternative wording to meet POV requirements. Or at least list all of your specific objections. This is the first time I've tried to write a Wikipedia entry, and I'm starting to feel that's it's my LAST TIME. Springheeledjack 19:36, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Note my statements on other AFD and apply here as well. No offense, but you're sounding much like a plant.--み使い Mitsukai 20:09, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

• I can assure you I am NOT an oak Tree, a fern, or any sort of other "plant". As far as I can determine, from reading the CURRENT Wiki guidelines, this request for deletion is not valid. I have disproven both intitial objections ("non-notable" and "advertising")and am well within the letter and spirit of the "law", on both entries. Instead of heaping the abuse on a first time poster, and trying to kill my articles, how about actually doing something CONSTRUCTIVE and help me "fix" it! Springheeledjack 20:39, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Okay, for starters, NO ALL CAPS IN SECTION HEADERS. That screams "we copied from a press release", whether you did so or not. Secondly, keep the language neutral. "The World of YBS" is market-speak. "Public reaction" or something like that is neutral. Lastly, again, look at some of the articles on games, then compare it to yours. Yours does sound like a press release. Tone down the language and keep it neutral. Sentences like "The YBS website even solicits people to submit new variations and games using the contents of the YBS box." aren't going to cut it, while something like "On the website, the company allows for the posting of variations and modifications to game rules" might work better. Granted, YMMV, but I'm hoping you're seeing what I'm getting at.

Also, lastly bear in mind that none of this is personal. We've all seen dozens of articles like yours, all without any altrusitic intentions whatsoever. You may be the lone exception to this, but past experience of many editors here, unfortunately, is not on your side.--み使い Mitsukai 21:29, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

• Edited for a more NPOV as suggested. Springheeledjack 22:35, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
• Weak delete per nominator. Most Google hits are unrelated, and the rest seem either "local boy makes good" or from non-notable sites. Most BoardGameGeek game pages have much more indication of interest from people other than the designer. For contrast, see Diplomacy (game) which has indications of notability and widespread influence, and many external sites that are real references and hobby-service sites (not just advertising and fan-speculation sites). Barno 00:52, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• Weak delete. No doubt at all that this is a real, released product. But the press link cited above says that it's sold just 600 units after nearly a year on the market, and it's had no attention on Boardgamegeek--not even any Personal Comments, which even the most obscure games usually have a few. It's a little hard to say where the line should be drawn with things like board games, but I'm sorry to say that I don't think this one makes it yet. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 01:14, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

• The WP:CORP only states that "multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the company itself" need to exist for it to be "notable". Those sources clearly exist. There is no requirement for a product or subject to have a "wide spread influence" or to sell above a certain number of units, for it to be "notable". If that were the case, at least 30% of Wikipedia should be deleted immediately on the grounds of "wide spread influence" alone. So, until the WP:CORP is altered regarding this, your objections are completely unfounded. Springheeledjack 01:31, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Car salesman 14:47, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete advertising for NN product Pete.Hurd 00:35, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete advertisement Ruby 01:14, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
• keep. reads nice -- Marvin147 04:40, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

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.