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. All "keep" comments are discounted as unfounded in applicable policy, guidelines or precedent (see WP:N in particular).  Sandstein  20:12, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

VNES[edit]

VNES (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Non-notable piece of software, full of "Digg'D" spin. Sceptre ^(talk) 23:10, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game related deletions. Someoneanother 01:56, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - temporary popularity from Digg does not appear to be sustained with notability from reliable sources. The closest thing I could find is a blog post on Engadget -- Whpq (talk) 13:03, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep It's quite a feat to create a fully working NES emulator in Javascript. Especially it being full speed, and nearly having every NES game at its disposal. I vote Keep as I believe it is notable in coding, emulation, the internet, and video games in general. ThunderPower (talk) 14:39, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - As the developer of vNES, I'd like to point out that the website gets well over 100,000 uniques per month. Additionally, NESCafe is not nominated for AfD, which does basically the same thing as vNES, but generally slower. 172.170.136.12 (talk) 14:46, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I proposed deletion of the NESCafe article because it doesn't cite any reliable sources. Articles on wikipedia don't get included based on the merit of the subject. Windows ME was probably one of the worst operating systems developed in the last 15 years, it has an article. Protonk (talk) 18:25, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Vista is by far worse than Windows Me.

• Keep - I vote to keep this article; while I agree it could use a lot of work, I think vNES is quite notable all things considered. Duff (talk) 15:17, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And how is this notability expressed? At this point, it's notability is expressed as your subjective personal opinion. Where is the objective evidence of notability such as articles about in reliable sources such as gaming magazines or websites? -- Whpq (talk) 17:06, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Googling for "VirtualNES" or "vNES" turns several references on blogs and sites of that sort. I'll also point out many other NES emulators have articles on Wikipedia which are just as, if not less, notable than vNES, and by your criteria should be deleted as well. As a side note, I'll point out vNES has consistently ranked in the top 50,000 websites on Alexa for the past several months, if not more. Duff (talk) 18:40, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Google and alexa rank are not guarantors of notability. Here Notability is a term of art distinct from the colloquial interpretation. You or I may find a high Alexa ranking as "notable" but the definition for purposes of Wikipedia is predicated not on subjective judgment (As much as it can be removed from it) but on criteria set beforehand and met by sourcing. vNES's uniqueness, inherent elegance and appeal do not factor in to this metric. As I said below, the vNES article is on the borderline of notability solely from the two sources that cover it in detail. Protonk (talk) 18:07, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - vNES is by far the one of the most used emulators on the net, and unique because of its coding in Java. Just look at its stats on Alexa. Additionally, it has been mentioned on several consumer and technology site, including LifeHacker. dvsdan (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:01, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep - To create a full-speed applet of any type is astonishing enough, let alone an emulator applet that can play NES games at full speed! Also note that vNES has NOT really broken any copyright laws except for the "legal expectations" of Nintendo for consumers to NOT create/own back-ups of the games they already own (which actually IS allowed under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act). According to Nintendo (who strongly detests the creation of back-ups in spite of it being 100% legal if you have the original media,) it's legal to make back-ups, but is ILLEGAL to use game copying devices which are needed to make these back-ups. They also say that ALL emulator programs are illegal in spite of the fact that the DMCA does NOT explicitly deem them as such. This is really a matter of international copyright reform, producers vs. consumers & capitalism vs. socialism.
• Weak Delete This is not a referendum on the DMCA or capitalism (WTF?) or consumer rights. Don't try to conflate the issues. The two sources cited (I don't count the vNES business) are a start toward meriting inclusion. They both cover the subject almost exclusively. There might be some discussion as to the amount of imputed notability they provide (my guess is very little), but that is a matter of degree. If the proponents of the emulator want to include blogs (that meet WP:RS) to the list of sources, that might tip me to neutral or weak keep, but as it stands there is little to recommend keeping it. That doesn't mean that vNES isn't cool or that coding an emulator in Java that runs well isn't an accomplishment. It is. But accomplishing a feat isn't grounds for inclusion into wikipedia. Protonk (talk) 03:32, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have been working on Wikifying the article - I really disliked the way it was written and laid out to begin with. Sanders has a list some places that have mentioned / wrote about vNES on his personal website here. Duff (talk) 11:39, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the two sites already referenced pretty much round out the RS coverage of vNES. Protonk (talk) 17:57, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll still go back to the comment I made earlier - if vNES is going to get deleted, why not delete the other NES emulator pages as well? I don't imagine each of them has achieved focus in several high-profile RS publications. Duff (talk) 19:36, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. If you feel those need to be deleted on their merits, then propose a deletion on their page. but their isn't a blanket policy that says (if we delete x page, we must delete all pages X, where x is in X). Protonk (talk) 20:43, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm aware of the policy, however considering there's only two popular web-based Java NES emulators in existence (NESCafe and vNES), and any number of "classic" desktop emulators, I think both are worthy of their page on Wikipedia, at least if worked and expanded upon. Duff (talk) 21:02, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mean to be rude but if that is your position on the subject then I'm not sure how you can be aware of the otherstuffexists "essay" (guess it isn't a policy) and hold that position unless you are intending to repudiate the otherstuffexists argument. If we were (for example) discussing two species of animals whose wikipedia articles were to be deleted, we could find no rationale to preserve either of them because they are 2 of a kind OR to preserve one because the other had enough secondary sourcing to be included. Protonk (talk) 18:07, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment All of these could potentially be argued for Improve, which Duff has done to the article. The notability has been established in several different locations. 172.135.79.130 (talk) 17:31, 24 June 2008 (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.