Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pavilion City
Popularity or widespread availability is not the issue here - it's quite normal for a piece of software to appear for download on lots of websites. The problem is the lack of reliable third-party sources reviewing the game, detailing its production, etc. A Google search for ''Pliston game''http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=pliston+game returns 71 unique results, almost all of them forum posts (not considered |reliable sources), and the relevent results peter out after the third page or so of the results. ''"Pavilion City" game''http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%22pavilion+city%22+game returns even fewer relevant results - five on the first page (four forum posts and the Wikipedia article) and nothing on later pages. Considering the number and scope of gaming websites on the internet, that's a sign of relatively low notability for any game (compare with, say Cave Story, another free independent game, which has tens of thousands of Google hits, numerous reviews and interviews on websites not connected with its creator, etc). If you can provide some reliable sources documenting these games (not just sites offering it for download or brief reviews), then you have a case for keeping the articles. As these articles stand, the lack of |verifiability is the biggest problem, as well as possible |conflict of interest issues
— User:Matticus78, 19:49, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:RS||WP:V||WP:COI (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)