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 delete; sources were searched for and not found. Those who are interested in this topic should take it to Hentaipedia, not Wikipedia. Shii (tock) 06:18, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Biko 3[edit]

Biko 3 (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 have searched in both English and Japanese and the game seems non-notable. I am also nominating these related pages for the same reason:

Biko 2: Reversible Face (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Jinkō Shōjo 2 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Sexy Beach 3 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

--Atlantima (talk) 21:11, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:50, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 00:50, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:51, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:51, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all - this is defintely not my cup of tea, but being the law-abiding Wikipedian I am, I searched for sources and found none, unless you want to call uvlist.net and vndb.org "sources". --24.145.65.56 (talk) 01:24, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all. Insufficient in-depth third-party coverage to justify self-standing articles. --DAJF (talk) 01:21, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Illusion (company), agree that they aren't sufficiently notable for their own pages but are listed on that page. J04n(talk page) 18:51, 31 March 2013 (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.