Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wurm Online

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. RL0919 (talk) 04:13, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wurm Online (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)

Major tone, advertising problems. DemonDays64 (talk) 23:45, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. DemonDays64 (talk) 23:45, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Wurm is a pretty notable MMO. How about instead of nominating it for deletion you spend that time fixing some of its supposed advertising issues? Bluedude588 (talk) 07:16, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Found lots of in-depth coverage in reliable sources, meets WP:GNG. Rock Paper Shotgun [1] [2], PC Gamer [3], Newport City Radio [4], Engadget [5][6], 2 pages on Eurogamer [7], PC World [8], The Register [9] and even some book coverage [10]. This magazine could be reliable too [11]. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 12:15, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep per invalid reason for deletion. Tone and advertising are content problems rather not notability problems (which is what AfD is for). GNG appears to be well-satisfied here with WP:VG/RS sources. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 22:39, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per user:Hellknowz.-Nahal^(T) 22:57, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep You click the Google news search at the top and it easily finds reliable sources giving significant coverage to this. The nominator needs to follow WP:BEFORE to avoid wasting everyone's time. Dream Focus 00:22, 17 December 2019 (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.