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 no consensus. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 18:52, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

VGMaps[edit]

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

Website is non-notable per notability (WP:N) and appears to have been created by site owner Jonathan Leung as an advertisement Fattestalbert (talk) 21:43, 13 February 2012 (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) 01:27, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:28, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep – The Attack of the Show! and the Joystiq articles may provide just enough to establish notability. However, the other sources are either user-generated or otherwise irrelevant. --MuZemike 21:07, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:54, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral. Joystiq and G4TV coverage seems to provide reliable, secondary sources for WP:GNG. But it is very borderline and the coverage is hardly significant. There are a few passing mentions here and there, but nothing more to satisfy WP:GNG. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 12:47, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Coverage in Joystiq and G4TV is not very significant and is from 2005. The gaming industry has since evolved to 3D games and screenshot maps are likely no longer to be needed or relevant. Overall, the site may have had some borderline/hardly significant coverage in 2005, but will likely become obsolete as time passes (i.e. coverage in reliable secondary sources is not likely to continue). --UnbornClarity (talk) 19:11, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Just because 'times have changed' in the video game industry, I feel, does not warrent the deletion of this article. I'm sure if you use that train of thought, you are suggesting that anything that is not relevent anymore should be deleted. To be honest, the NES game Orb-3D is not really relevent anymore but it still warrents a Wikipedia article. Skullbird11 (talk) 14:46, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, v/r - T P 21:00, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - Sufficient reliable sources, would suggest finding a few more to broaden the article Skullbird11 (talk) 14:46, 1 March 2012 (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.