Veloren : Ultimately, I don't think any adequate sourcing has cropped up since the result of the last AfD, and so do not believe there is sufficient notability.  I've provided an assessment of most of the sources in the article below.  I've omitted sources that are unambiguously not GNG compliant (subject website is used more than once, for example).  A general Google search doesn't present anything useful, and a news search only gives me 3 results for https://www.gamingonlinux.com which - as best I can tell - is user generated and WP:VG/RS states it's unreliable (granted the linked  discussion is pretty bare).  It's got 1 GNG compliant source, best I can tell, and it doesn't have nearly enough pull.  Source assessment table: prepared by User:Sirdog Source Independent?  Reliable?  Significant coverage?  Count source toward GNG ?  https://veloren.net/ Subject website ~ ✘ No https://larepublica.pe/videojuegos/2022/02/12/los-mejores-videojuegos-gratuitos-que-puedes-descargar-en-tu-computadora Trivially mentioned in a list of free games ✘ No https://www.gamestar.de/artikel/minecraft-die-besten-alternativen-2022,3378793.html Trivially mentioned in a list of free games ✘ No https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/veloren User generated Database entry with no commentary or anaylsis ✘ No https://snapcraft.io/veloren Store page entry to download subject ✘ No https://gitlab.com/veloren/veloren/-/releases/v0.14.0 Subject source code repository User generated ✘ No https://www.gamingonlinux.com/2020/06/interviewed-veloren-an-upcoming-foss-multiplayer-voxel-rpg/ Interview with developer of subject Listed as unreliable at WP:VG/RS + user-generated ✘ No https://blog.desdelinux.net/veloren-videojuego-codigo-abierto-inspirado-cube-world/ Despite having "blog" in the title, their editorial ethics as listed at [67] appear to be sound.  Cannot find on-wiki discussion, and a cursory Google search doesn't show anything concerning.  ✔ Yes https://jugandoenlinux.com/index.php/homepage/exploracion/1315-veloren-estrena-su-version-0-10 Appears to be a hobbyist website with no attempts or reputation for fact checking ~ ✘ No https://www.mmosquare.com/games/reviews/veloren Database of games website, no idea who adds content - nor is it listed - and the review reeks promotional without any intent for any kind of neutral commentary ✘ No https://www.kdeblog.com/veloren-un-juego-rpg-combinacion-de-zelda-y-minecraft.html All content (or atleast an overwhelming majority) appears to be written by a single individual, no listed policies regarding fact checking or reliability, calls itself a blog... best assessment is that it's user generated.  ✘ No This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.  Created using {{ source assess table }} .  — Sirdog ( talk ) 02:25, 18 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions .  — Sirdog ( talk ) 02:25, 18 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I understand the issue but why is it G4 if I had made sufficient changes at the beginning?  I created the page this time and everything was manually written with help from a few sources.  What do you suggest, can be done, in this case?  Also, are any of these links reliable enough for inclusion?  https://www.f2pg.com/veloren/ https://flathub.org/apps/net.veloren.veloren https://libregamewiki.org/Veloren https://alternativeto.net/software/veloren/about/ https://gameforge.com/en-US/gmag/veloren/ https://www.classcentral.com/course/youtube-veloren-open-source-self-hosted-endless-world-adventure-game-like-roblox-and-minecraft-192926 https://lutris.net/games/veloren/ https://snapcraft.io/veloren https://news.ycombinator.com/item? id=30667022 Please note that I'm relatively very new to Wikipedia editing therefore I need your help in understanding certain things so as to smoothly navigate my editing journey.  If you suggest what else should/must be done, it would be very helpful.  Thanks PRIYANSHU 02:45, 18 August 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Priyanshu1rai ( talk • contribs ) Hello, Priyanshu1rai !  You may have misread me above, but I was stating this is not a G4.  I'm happy to answer any questions you have about editing, notability, etc.  Feel free to reach out on my talk page or at the Teahouse .  Doing so here would be inappropriate.  My analysis of the sources you provided above is as follows for the purposes of this discussion: https://www.f2pg.com/veloren/ - N Is a simple overview of the game on a website dedicated to listing free games.  For sources to prove notability, they need to provide significant coverage and commentary.  https://flathub.org/apps/net.veloren.veloren - N Appears to be a platform to download the game.  https://libregamewiki.org/Veloren - N A wiki is comprised of user generated content and is ineligible to show notability, as it isn't reliable .  https://alternativeto.net/software/veloren/about/ - N Same general issue as www.f2pg.com.  https://gameforge.com/en-US/gmag/veloren/ - N Same general issue as www.f2pg.com.  https://www.classcentral.com/course/youtube-veloren-open-source-self-hosted-endless-world-adventure-game-like-roblox-and-minecraft-192926 - N A free online course on how to run the game by a YouTuber is not reliable https://lutris.net/games/veloren/ - N Same general issue as www.f2pg.com. .  https://snapcraft.io/veloren - N I evaluated the source in the table above.  https://news.ycombinator.com/item? id=30667022 - N Appears to be a user generated forum.  — Sirdog ( talk ) 03:02, 18 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete based on both source tables above.  Nothing for notability, despite being ref-bombed.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 14:11, 18 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Veloren and WP:TOOSOON .  There are a head-spinning amount of sources thrown around, but nothing reliable.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 05:02, 18 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete The article has ample sources that do not generally demonstrate a reliable and independent origin, being drawn largely from blogs, download sites and primary sources.  This can be frustrating when a lot of work has been put in to compile sources from across the Internet on a topic, but the coverage falls short of the standard needed to establish that the subject matter is notable.  ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk ) 13:20, 18 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per Vrxces.  SWinxy ( talk ) 21:01, 19 August 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete