Deletion of Battle Dawn

Comment: The does not appear to meet criteria set out in either  or . The material within it is not |verifiable and is basically |crystal balling, meaning that it is asserting ''future'' notability- it must be notable ''now'' in order to merit an article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB||WP:SOFTWARE||WP:V||WP:NOT)

Comment: We're running into a number of odd technicalities that can ultimately be ignored.  The state of Battledawn has been labeled "Beta Testing."  The reasoning behind this label is that the game is updated on a regular basis as bugs and imbalances are discovered, but it has always been the same game.  Perhaps saying the game is in Beta Testing because of its regular updates is incorrect by most standards because this would also mean Windows Operating systems never left the Beta stage and most of the biggest PC games released in the past 5 years were still in their beta stages.  Regardless of its "Beta" titling, it is being advertised, played and updated as a full game.  I believe Micheal, Battledawn's developer, has dubbed it Beta because he feels it gives him the right to make changes as he pleases without feeling totally unprofessional until the game has gotten to a point that he feels is perfectly tuned and he is allowed to move on to a new project.  Frankly, I agree with this outlook because the only true testing a game can get is in the hands of the public and at least Micheal is humble enough to realize his game was not totally perfect upon release.  I'm insulted when I'm forced to fork out $50 for a game only to find out I'm just another Beta tester until the clean version is around after a number of months or even years.  As for  and , Battledawn is only required to meet 1 of their criteria to satisfy Wikepedia's standards.  In , #3 states "The content is distributed via a site which is both well known and independent of the creators, either through an online newspaper or magazine, an online publisher, or an online broadcaster."  Any of the game listing sites on which Battledawn has been highly rated qualify as distributors of this type.  They are not merely distributing content so trivially as Newgrounds or Geocities are, but instead are listing Battledawn above other notable games in a ranking of quality and popularity.  Furthermore,  #1 states that "user guides" qualify as the sort of independent publications that may define content as nontrivial.  Well, these game listing websites are, above all else, user guides.  Their sole purpose is to help game players find other games they may be interested in.  The fact of the matter is that Battledawn is a phenemenon on the internet that, though relatively small, has already made its mark.  It has sucked up a vast number of players from older games of similar genres and quickly earned their loyalty, not as testers, but players.  Yes, Micheal has reserved the right to make drastic changes in the name of improvement whenever he pleases, but if calling a game Beta is the cost of that right, I wish more games did so.  I say you leave the article up.  Perhaps it could use some work, but no argument here justifies its deletion so if no more information can be brought to the table, this process must be halted.   -Rockytastic
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB||WP:SOFTWARE||WP:WEB||WP:SOFTWARE)