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 Deleted, yet another non-notable web game :-( Cyde Weys 17:11, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per lack of notability. --Abu Badali 20:33, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:NOTE. Baseball,Baby!balls•strikes 23:00, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment 27,600 hits on a Google search, there must be some notability. TheTallOne 13:46, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- Just because you've never heard of it does not mean it fails the notability test. It certainly exists so it passes the verification test and it is not software product it is an online browser game, many of which have pages on wikipedia such as Urban Dead and Ogame. It has a loyal following numbering in the thousands and deserves to have a wikipedia page. Kripcat 14:30, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- Bushtarion has existed since June 2001. The domain has been owned since mid 2002. It has won numerous awards/first places on the largest of the "directory websites" for online games, including winning 2 years running on (arguably one of the largest/most well known browser based game directories) MPOGD.com "game of the month" and about to win the third (you can only win once every 13 months). Advertising for Bushtarion is currently running on Google AdWords, a full sponsorship of TopWebGames, and a full sponsorship of MPOGD.com. Google returns "Results 1 - 10 of about 26,900 for bushtarion". The phrases "free online multiplayer game" and "free multiplayer game" (not exact phrase - no quotes in search - so harder to achieve by far with Google search technology) currently list Bushtarion on page 2 of Google search (out of about 20,000,000 to 25,000,000 results), page 1 (at rank 1 to 2 for "free multiplayer game" search) of Yahoo, and page 1 of MSN search. An iWebTool "All-in-One Lookup" currently gives the following external link information for Bushtarion.com; Pages linking to entire www.bushtarion.com website 6,148. Listings on Google Search 1,970. Listings on MSN Search 381. Listings on Yahoo Search 206. Over six thousand seperate websites linking to the domain, all of the above information, the age of the game, and the many many tens of thousands of players who have passed through the game certainly do not make the game "Not Notable". As far as browser based games go, Bushtarion is currently very notable in the online world. Azzer007 16:15, 18 August 2006 (UTC) — Possible single purpose account: Azzer007 (talk • contribs) has made little or no other contributions outside this topic. Azzer007, "single purpose account" tags do not have to be signed. Srose(talk) 19:27, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not being interested in commenting on other topics all the time does not warrant the devaluation of a comment, especially one as well researched as this comment. The user account was created before afd flag went up. Also note that every user account has to have a first comment somewhere, perhaps on a subject matter the user feels warrants his/her time. There are now concerns about a vested interest against the Bushtarion article (or Bushtarion itself?) - somebody seems to be seeking any excuse possible to have this article deleted, and is trying to devalue any valid comments from valid users that are otherwise disproving the accused "lack of notability". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Azzer007 (talk • contribs) .
Comment: Winning an award on a game directory websites, advertising, existing a few years or having a couple of thousand hits on search engines does not make a webgame notable. Oh and your account has primarily been used to edit the bushtarion article or inserting mentions of bushtarion in other articles. May I ask you if are you involved in developing the game, Azzer? --Peephole 18:52, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Of course I am involved in it - how do you think I can pull up so many facts/sources on notability and advertising? Perhaps you can tell me what makes a game notable, if not tens thousands of users through the ages, a 5 year history, news articles on the game being published on multiple gaming websites (I am happy to source these for you if you are skepitcal), extremely high ranks for major search phrases as "free multiplayer game" (in fact equalling Wiki's own search ranking for the same search phrase for Wiki's MMORPG page) which are not really/realistically possible to be engineered (recommended reading: Google Technology). Why are you so desperate for this notable game to have it's Wiki entry deleted? Are you a deletionist? Do you wish to ignore these facts? Are you upset that I am disputing your afd flag? Are you taking it as a personal attack on yourself/your beliefs of what is notable, and so seeking any means necessary to mark for deletion and ignoring any facts? Please take the time to actually dispute the sources of information provided as to why it is notable, so your points of it not being notable can be considered as fact and not being presumptuous or otherwise. I think the ullness is now on you, now that notability has, in my opinion, been established. I note also you have marked a number of other games up for deletion, and have found a few comments against your "deletionist" attitude with a quick Google search - I wonder, purely as a point of interest, do you play any browser based games yourself? --Azzer007 19:02, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Coverage by reliable sources (WP:RS) would make the game notable. --Peephole 20:01, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: In the modern web world, I think Google can be seen as "covering" a subject by relating its search ranks with related phrases. I won't give further information than has already been given on this coverage, from a source that is one of the most well known and advanced in the web world right now. Appropriate media could be seen as gaming websites, I will list some from a recent Press Release for the game, providing links to the actual news article (remember, these sites have independant editors that decide if an article is news-worthy enough to actually publish a press release); MPOGD (alexa 38,720), World Online Games (alexa 52,140), OMGN (alexa 48,582). I cannot prove this 100% without spending many hours looking, but for any weight, I believe Bushtarion to be the only browser based game to make it on to Million Dollar Homepage (Million_Dollar_Homepage Wiki entry), though I will agree this point is more as a point of interest vaguely related to notability, rather than notability in and of itself. What do you feel are appropriate or necessary sources that would apply to browser based games, if none of the above are to your mind relevant? --Azzer007 20:24, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Appropriate sources would be for example newspaper articles or gaming magazines. --Peephole 20:36, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Does every single encyclopaedic entry on the entire of Wikipedia require a newspaper or magazine printed article to allow the article to stay? I ask out of curiousity. Secondly, is ignoring online gaming websites articles about an online game that exists purely in the online world not being horse-blinkered, ignorant, and outdated (especially given we are having this discussion on an online web-based encyclopedia)? I have provided all the relevant sources you could ask for that relate to an online only browser based game, why do you choose to ignore these as sources? How common or likely is a printed article going to be for an online browser-based game? I'm not saying none would exist for any game, I'm actually saying that demanding printed articles and printed articles only is incredibly... silly? --Azzer007 20:56, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm not demanding printed articles, online newspaper or gaming articles would be just as fine. --Peephole 22:01, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Great, as they are provided in my comment above :) --Azzer007 22:17, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Press releases are rarely reliable sources. And the websites you sent them to, are barely notable as well.--Peephole 22:24, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment You ask for information, I provide it, you try to ignore/dismiss it (unless you personally have heard of it?). Their Alexa rankings alone prove all three to be immensely used websites (you yourself have cited low Alexa rankings - in the 2,000,000+ range - as reasons to delete Wiki entries citing notability, so don't now try and dismiss high alexa rankings) - I have a feeling we can go in roundabouts about this forever, with you dismissing all valid sources simply because you don't like the source/you want to stick to your deletion flag. MPOGD, OMGN, and World Online Games to name a few are huge online game sites (as seen by their Alexa ranks) in the field of "Web Based Games" (as well as other online games). They are the most relevant sources you can find (sites such as Gamespot, and gaming magazines like PCZone, focus on "store-bought" graphical games, not web games - so they are not valid sources).--Azzer007 22:41, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Actually I don't think Alexa rankings are all that important but if you really wanna go that way... Mpogd.com is ranked 38,720, omgn.com is ranked 48,582 and Worldonlinegames.com is ranked 52,140. Oh and alexa rankings work the other way around, the lower the better. So their alexa rankings actually tell that they're not all that popular sites.--Peephole 22:53, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I know what their Alexa rankings are - if you look up, you'll see I've actually already posted them. I also know that the lower the rankings the better - hence my point about you using Alexa as a reason for lack of notability on a site with more than 2,0000,000 Alexa ranking, and me listing 3 gaming directory websites around the 40-50k mark. I have made a lot of effort here tonight - perhaps you would like to try and add weight to your side and make a little effort now; what online web game directory websites do you think are notable? List three news sites/directory sites that feature/specialise in online web games (this article subject's field), so that everybody knows in future what would, in your eyes, make a web based game "Notable" for me (with their Alexa rankings if you wish, though I can check that myself).--Azzer007 23:27, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- Bushtarion has a whole irc and forum community based around this game including bi-annual meetings held around the UK. To the members of the community, it is VERY notable. Steve_God 22:12, 18 August 2006 (UTC)— Possible single purpose account: Steve_God (talk • contribs) has made little or no other contributions outside this topic.[reply]
Comment:I registered my account before the deletion for the website and had registered recently for other reasons not relavent to this discussion. --Steve_God 23:41, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- Bushtarion is noteable as stated above, and I have made edits to help with the NPOV issue and to ensure it appears less as an ad and more of an information source. timster69 12:26, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Bushtarion is a browser based game, and so neither WP:WEB nor WP:SOFTWARE are appropriate nor accurate for reasons of deletion. Any claims of WP:NOTE have, in my opinion, been blown entirely out of the water and then duly ignored. Perhaps you could direct your comments as to why it is not notable, to provide weight to your vote? I took the effort to try and prove the notability, could you take the effort to disprove it? I genuinely would value further comments on this discussion, and what editors/wiki users think would make a web game notable, if none of the above reasons or facts do (please don't simply link to WP:WEBWP:SOFTWARE or WP:NOTE, this would be blatant ignorance, I have read through them thoroughly) --Azzer007 20:04, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - First of all, please do not accuse other editors of being ignorant. It is not going to help your case in the slightest. I have read the article, its history, researched it on google, and looked at your edit history; I don't think I'm ignorant. Second of all, my arguments have been stated before, but I will reiterate them. 26,000 hits is not sufficient in my opinion, especially for something that is computer based. 6,000 pages link to Bushtarion's page - I'd guess at least 5,000 of them are blogs. I will look at this when I finish my comment. If you could direct us to where exactly the awards are located and what other games have won the awards, it would be a tremendous help. Srose(talk) 20:35, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Google limits it's own internal link-results severely (as do Yahoo and MSN), and try to only give a sample. You can use the Google API, SOAP to have many many more results returned to you, though there are still limitations. This is one reason why web developers and publishers rely on third party applications such as the free Back Link Analyzer, which can help provide more (though sometimes still limited, especially with the Google API limited to 1000 results per API key per 24 hours) backlink information. Websites such as iWebTool provide online backlink information, if you wish to test this without downloading any applications. Hope that information answers your question/comment? --Azzer007 20:56, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Regarding the "awards and other notable games in this category"; MPOGD "game of the months" listing back to December 1999. Bushtarion entries: Two (with third on it's way if you check their main page). Other "notable" games that have also won this title; Planetarion (many times, particularly before the once-per-13-months limitation), Hattrick, Runescape, Ultima Online, Asheron's Call, Ferion, Lunatix Online, et al. --Azzer007 21:02, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(Fixing indent) Just so you know, Planetarion, Ultima Online, and Ferion are up for deletion; Lunatix doesn't have an article, and only Hattrick, Runescape, and Asheron's Call are currently uncontested (although Runescape and its subarticles are put up for deletion somewhat regularly). Just wanted to share that information...but my opinion stands; I've never found google link tests to be that restrictive. Srose(talk) 21:12, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Ultima Online doesn't have the afd flag that I can see. Ferion's doesn't seem to have the "discuss/vote/talk" page, though I don't really know how that works so perhaps that is intentional. Regardless - Hattrick, Runescape, and Asheron's Call are not currently contested (and I see no reason why they should be - they are major games) - and the fact is those games are all incredibly major/notable games that almost anyone who has been online/involved in online games in the past 5 years will have heard of, with the exception of perhaps Lunatix to an extent (and whether or not Peephole wants to flag their articles for deletion or not). You asked me to provide a link to awards, and list other notable games that had won it. I provided you with that information. Do you dispute the link, or do you think none of the other games I listed that had won the award are at all notable in the online games world? I'm sorry, but I feel like every time I provide information, it is being ignored or other "rules" are being applied to try and get around any of my comments, like it's a personal vendetta against online games having a Wiki entry (see above comments for immediate example - Peephole asks for reliable sources of press releases, I provide it, then he comments that he wants printed press releases in newspapers/magazines... etc.) - I really hope this isn't the case, as I always see Wiki as the place for encyclopaedic information on almost any subject you could wish for, I never knew there were editors that went around deleting things like this (I could understand if they were articles about my neighbours dog, sure! But major online games!?). I can see absolutely no reason why anyone could seem so adamant, perhaps even desperate, to delete entirely valid and acceptable entries (as I say - they are hardly about my neighbours dog, they aren't vanity articles, they aren't adverts, there is lots of relevant information and sources online for them, etc.!). Would nothing sway your minds from your original opinions? --Azzer007 21:51, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
After Googling for about 15 seconds I found an independent article on this game. Odd that nobody else found it. It seems notable to me, so Keep. syphonbyte(t|c) 07:50, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Syphonbyte, would it be possible to provide a link to this independent article? TheTallOne 08:32, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep After reading the independent article posted by Syphonbyte in the main article, I can see sufficient evidence that this article has notability. TheTallOne 08:48, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
CommentActually that's not an "independent" article but a press release by Azzer. --Peephole 13:10, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Comment of Azzer007 at 20:24, 20 August 2006 UTC:
"Appropriate media could be seen as gaming websites, I will list some from a recent Press Release for the game, providing links to the actual news article (remember, these sites have independant editors that decide if an article is news-worthy enough to actually publish a press release); MPOGD (alexa 38,720), World Online Games (alexa 52,140), OMGN (alexa 48,582)." --TheTallOne 13:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment May I also put forward a question asked by Azzer007, which to now still has not been answered.
On 20 August, 2006 at 23:27 UTC, Azzer007 wrote: "...what online web game directory websites do you think are notable? List three news sites/directory sites that feature/specialise in online web games (this article subject's field), so that everybody knows in future what would, in your eyes, make a web based game "Notable" for me (with their Alexa rankings if you wish, though I can check that myself)". --TheTallOne 15:45, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Any respectable newspaper or respectable gaming site would be fine. Check WP:RS on what reliable sources are. --Peephole 16:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I believe the onus is now on you, Peephole, as information and sources have been provided multiple times on request, and dismissed with no effort on your part. You cannot simply dismiss a source, give a reference to a long winded and fairly vague reference that is a catch-all for any form of "reliable source" in the entire media (and even not-so-media) world, and then cover your ears singing la-la-la. You flagged it for deletion, you are trying to dismiss appropriate sources as being not-notable, and so you are now asked to link to appropriate and relevant sources that you think would be, in your personal opinion (as this is, afterall, now all down to personal opinion by the looks of it, rather than any form of fact), notable - given that this is on the subject of online web games (not console games, not store-bought/shelf/video games, or in other words "software", as you cited in your original deletion nomination, and not general world news/world media - as none of those are appropriate or relevant for the fields of online web-games). Once you do this, assuming none of the sites you provide have made mention of Bushtarion before and assuming they are indeed relevant and appropriate, I will seek to gain future notability with them (though this also assumes your dismissal of every other source, fact, and notability is in fact warranted official and fair, and that somebody else wouldn't in future mark the article for deletion again and dismiss those sources you provide as they haven't heard of them or don't believe them to be notable... and round and round we go).--Azzer007 16:40, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
CommentAzzer007 does ask you to name three web browser gaming sites which have an Alexa rating considerably greater than those previously mentionned - i.e. sites with Alexa traffic rankings at least better than 20,000. He wants you to put them on this page, along with the traffic rankings so he can check the credability. Basically, he wants you to find web browser gaming directory sites (which focus on games such as Bushtarion and not ones which involve high intensity graphics) which you deem notable. -- TheTallOne 16:31, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Why doesn't he find them himself?--Peephole 16:45, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Because I've danced to your tune above and beyond the call of duty enough now in this discussion, while you simply sit there saying "Nah, not notable" "Nah, I don't like it" to anything you can (whilst ignoring any comments & sources you cannot dismiss off-hand) and linking to very vague and non-directed Wiki articles. While I'm sure you're enjoying it, there's only so much dancing another person will do when you whistle. As I stated in my above comment, the onus is most definitely on you now to disprove the notability points provided, and provide evidence that there is, in fact, far more notable appropriate and relevant sites that have not covered Bushtarion at all. I cannot find any myself, but obviously if you've dismissed the ones I have provided as not being notable, then clearly the reason for doing so must be because you know of much more notable ones. So, what are they?--Azzer007 16:51, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I was under the impression that the article I provided was going to settle this debate. The fact that this game also has a very large fansite and a lot of online documentation about it seems to make it notable to me. syphonbyte(t|c) 17:03, 21 August 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.