Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Turf (the 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. (non-admin closure) Satellizer el Bridget ^(Talk) 13:41, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Turf (the game)

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

App with no evidence of any notability. Only one independent ref which demonstrates that it is used but little else. Remaining refs are own web-site or selling pitches. Fails WP:GNG Velella ^{Velella Talk} 12:43, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The article fits well on Wikipedia, and is present on the Swedish Wikipedia pages. "What's Turf" is the "What is ..." search that increased second-most on Google in 2012 in Sweden, so it´s need for people to find it in a encyclopedia lika Wikipedia. 22:34, 16 July 2016 (GMT)

Delete: Google search results show no coverage in reilible sources. KGirlTrucker81^{talk what I'm been doing} 13:51, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look now at the sources that have been added to the article. Kildor (talk) 10:40, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And now you can look again... Optimus Turf (talk) 01:48, 20 July 2016 (GMT +2)

Keep. I have added a language link to the Swedish Wikipedia article now. In that article, you can find references to numerous of newspaper articles and references from radio and TV news in Sweden. The article needs improvements though, i.e. proper disambiguation in the article name, notability references, categorization, etc. Created in 2011, it is an early augmented reality massively multiplayer online location-based game, preceeding now popular games like Ingress and Pokémon Go. As such, the game has been mentioned several times in media and articles, both from a technical and social point of view. Kildor (talk) 14:23, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This game is free unless you want to be a supporter. Its pretty big in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finlad and some more European countries. Strange someone say no coverage in relilible sources as there are lots of articles from swedish magazzines, tv-news and more. If this article is deleted, why keep articles from other games such PokemonGo and Ingress? Fotojoc (talk) 00:08, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete. What is notable for the Swedish Wikipedia isn't necessarily notable for the English language Wikipedia. WP:VG/RS does include non-English sources. But when I look up "turf andrimon", on the custom Google search engine, I get zero results. Also, Fotojoc (talk · contribs) only two edits have been on this talk page, which are WP:OTHERSTUFF. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 08:59, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell from WP:VG/RS, there are zero (0) Swedish language sources in the list of sources used for the custom search enginge. So I don't think your search proves anything. Why don't you check the references in the article instead, and tell if you think these are, or are not, sufficient to establish the notability of this game? Kildor (talk) 10:30, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Again, what is notable for the Swedish Wikipedia doesn't necessarily mean it is notable for the English language Wikipedia. If it is notable, how come not a single source mentions it there? IGN and Eurogamer for instance feature different languages. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 13:07, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am not talking about the Swedish Wikipedia now. I am talking about the references given in the article you want to be deleted here. Have you actually looked at them at all? Kildor (talk) 19:03, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I thought you were referring to the Swedish Wikipedia link. Look, I'm not a bad guy, hell-bent on deleting this article. Hell, I improved the article, despite I think it should go. I looked over the references too, to see if they establish notability. Out of the nine it currently has, two are by developer Andrimon. Those two can't be used to establish notability, as they are primary sources. The last one is about the zones, also not notable. The Umeå University bit is certainly interesting, but it scientific research, not general media. The source that a Tuf even was held at DreamHack proves it did, but again, a primary source. The newspapers and radio sources however are most definitely notable. That makes four reliable sources. But per WP:GNG, we need "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". I checked if maybe I made an error on the WP:VG/RS custom Google search engine. Looking up other words and phrases, like "turf sweden", "turf gps", "turf game", I found the similarly titled Turf: Geography Club and Geo, another location-based game. I also double-checked to see if IGN Sweden and Eurogamer Sweden did mention the game, but they do not. So no, I do not think Turf meets Wikipedia's guidelines on notability. Maybe it is just WP:TOOSOON at this point and it will get huge someday, who knows. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 08:04, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No hard feelings here. I fully respect your opinion that Turf does not meet the Wikipedia criteria of notability. And thank you for the improvements! But let us turn to discuss what is needed to fullfil those criteria. Yes, three different newspaper articles and one radio feature are currently referenced in the enwiki article. Note that all of them has 'Turf' as the main topic. In the Swedish wiki article, there are references to at least 10 articles from different independent newspapers in Sweden, articles that also have Turf as the main topic. And two radio features, and two TV features. (Yes, those references are found on the Swedish Wikipedia article, but can easily be transferred here if necessary). And there are also some articles from a Swedish computer/gaming magazine: [1] [2] [3]. Let me know what you think. I personally think this is more than enough, but I am quite certain I can find more links if really needed. Kildor (talk) 21:29, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Put some more links in today. I can put in maybee 20 more from different papers but they often have the same "message" and I don´t know if there sould be more than 3 different links to the same text phrase on Wiki ? My problem is that I only know articles in Swedish and many of them takes the article away from the net after some months... [4] Optimus Turf (talk) 01:48, 20 July 2016 (GMT +2)

Keep. The game is used by many people in (at least) 9 countries and isn´t "only a Swedish game". The article is now more compleete, although further updates will be made (probably by multiple users). Optimus Turf (talk) 11:23, 17 July 2016 (GMT +2)

Optimus Turf (talk · contribs) is another possible WP:COI account. WP:ITSPOPULAR is not a reason to keep an article. Nobody discounted it as a "Swedish game" either. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 09:44, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What makes you think Optimus Turf is a WP:COI account? As far as I can tell, this user is one of several thousands Turf players, and I hope that does not disqualify him/her to write about the game here. I cannot find anything that indicates this user is affiliated with the publishing company or similar. Kildor (talk) 10:35, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, their user name is Optimus Turf and a vast majority of their edits concern this article. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 13:07, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, unfortunately many other usernames I tested before was occupied. But my name is exactly the same to my game-account on my iPhone so it still was not foreign to me... Do you want a photo proof of my iPhone ? Optimus Turf (talk) 09:50, 27 July 2016 (GMT +2)

I didn't mean to offend you, @Optimus Turf:. A WP:COI account is a user that edits for themselves, a friend or the company they work for, usually trying to portray the subject in a more positive light. Having an article shows the subject is notable, so some companies actually try to take advantage of Wikipedia. The reason why I thought you could be a WP:COI account was because you are relatively new (your first edit was on July 16) and you haven't edited anything that isn't related to Turf. I was suspicious, because Fotojoc (talk · contribs) has only two edits, which are in vote of keeping this article. But don't worry, I don't think you have any ties to Turf or the company, I think you're just a fan of Turf. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 08:24, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Soetermans (talk · contribs) What do you mean about "Optimus Turf is another possible WP:COI account" ??? I do not think we know each other so I mated me for defamation!

And now back to the topic. Well, then we have a couple of more articles on Wikipedia to delete, that are "almost the same" as Turf and have the same type of popularity and "Conflict of interest". Munzee, Pokémon Go (well, that's a big article), Can You See Me Now?, Ingress (video game) (also a big article), Wherigo and a lot of others... Now you will probably say that the fact that other sides are "bad" will not affect this site, but then I hope you fight to the other is removed as well? I note that we do not think alike, but if some articles in the same vein is OK I really think that everyone should be it! You can not "change the rules" and only approve old stuff (and no new ones) on such a widely used page like this.

Again, we're not discussing other articles, we're discussing the article on Turf. That is WP:OTHERSTUFF. It is not "widely discussed" and I'm not changing any rules (nor am I able to). Please look up the relevant guidelines on deletion discussions. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 13:07, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If keeping, please rename to Turf (game). I may later look at notability but see above that the direction is keeping and am not a deletionist anyway. gidonb (talk) 11:33, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's better without the but someone says that this change should be done after the discussion is ended. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Optimus Turf (talk • contribs) 22:42, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is exactly why I did not move the article but put a comment here. gidonb (talk) 01:33, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If it's kept, it should be disambiguated to "video game", not just "game", that's typically how it's done. -- Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:26, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as the listed sources are still not satisfying and I'm not seeing anything else particularly convincing, best deleted and restarted if at all. SwisterTwister talk 19:03, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as Swedish is my native language, I decided to take a look at the sources used: (numbering based on this revision)

#1 and 8 are from the developer's website - OK to use, I suppose, but does nothing to indicate notability
#2 is an interview with one of the top players about the game. Also includes a "quick facts" type of box with information about the game. Published by Vestmanlands Läns Tidning, a Västmanland province newspaper founded in 1831. Might indicate notability.
#3 is an interview with three players about the game. Published by Norran, a Västerbotten province newspaper founded in 1910. Might indicate notability.
#4 links to a scan of a newspaper clipping from the Åland Islands newspaper Ålandstidningen, which was founded in 1891. Without issue number etc it would be difficult to verify it, so I can't see this being used to indicate notability.
#5 is a blog post by ethnologists at Umeå University. I do not think this is better than any random person's blog in terms of indicating notability for a video game.
#6 and 7 are features about the game on Sveriges Radio, the national publicly funded radio broadcaster in Sweden. Might indicate notability.
#9 is an article in the web edition of PC för Alla, the largest computer magazine in Sweden. Might indicate notability.

Now number 14

#10 is a guide to apps used outdoors. I am unfamiliar with the website, M3, but it is published by the same company as PC för Alla

Now number 15

#11 is an article/interview on Jnytt. I have never heard of it, but it claims to be the largest news site in Småland. Unsure if it indicates notability.

Now number 16

#12 and 13 are articles by Barometern, the largest newspaper in Småland. Might indicate notability.

Now number 17+18

#14 is just Dreamhack's page on some Turf event held there in 2011. Does not indicate notability.

Now number 19

#15 is a table of some sort of gameplay data. There's no information on who publishes it or where they get the information on, so unless proven otherwise, I'm gonna say it does not indicate notability.

Now number 20

#16 is an article in a local weekly newspaper, published in Lerum Municipality since 1967. Unsure if this is enough to indicate notability.

Now number 21

Not all of these sources are usable, but I believe the ones that are might be enough to satisfy the general notability guideline.--IDV^talk 12:34, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New links on number 9-13. Number 9 from Turf´s own Wiki, 10 from Sjællands Nyheder i Danish, 11 from Ålandstidningen (same as above, Finnish paper in Swedish), 12 from Österbottens Tidning (Finnish paper in Swedish), 13 from Hufvudstadsbladet (Finnish paper in Swedish). Optimus Turf (talk) 10:30, 27 July 2016 (GMT +2)

Keep per User:Kildor's rationale. --Fixuture (talk) 14:15, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Changing vote to keep, thanks to @IDV:'s breakdown of the references. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 18:28, 26 July 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.