Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GameSpy Arcade

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The result was Nom withdrawn and Speedy Keep. Navou ^talk 17:49, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GameSpy Arcade (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Reads like an ad Navou ^talk 17:01, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy Keep - Site and its associated software is used by millions of users. 3 million Ghits. Extensive media coverage. Easily meets either any of WP:SOFT, WP:CORP or WP:WEB (take your pick). The article content didn't read like an ad to me, and it even includes a section on criticism; but if you don't like what it says, perhaps you should attempt to improve it. Tarinth 17:21, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Discussion It just comes across to me as a self promoting article without cites other than the products website. Navou ^talk 17:33, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of better cites or sources isn't by itself a reason for deletion, especially for something that can be quickly verified as a notable product/vendor/company. There's quite a wealth of articles written about it on the Internet that you could probably add a few more neutral references in the time it took to go through the AfD-listing process. Tarinth 17:40, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Passes #1 of WP:SOFTWARE (proposed): "The software is among the core products of a notable software developer or vendor." --- RockMFR 17:33, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This is inane. Gamespy is an obvious keep. Thedreamdied 17:41, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep instead of an AfD, may I suggest Template:Advert as a clean-up tag? FrozenPurpleCube 17:48, 24 December 2006 (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.