Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/El Tesoro de Isla Alcachofa

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 keep. Sources brought forward to show notability. Sources do not have to be in English. RL0919 (talk) 14:22, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

El Tesoro de Isla Alcachofa

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

El Tesoro de Isla Alcachofa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Article about a video game from a small non-notable developer. Page consists primarily of quotes from primary sources and some small review sites. Nothing which puts it over the WP:NSOFT threshold for inclusion. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 13:58, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 13:58, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 13:58, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 13:58, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

• In fairness, the game has been covered by sources like El Mundo ([1]), Diario AS / MeriStation ([2], [3]) and Micromanía ([4]). It has been cited as a piece of Spanish software history and as its developer's "most ambitious" game by El Español / Vandal ([5]), recently named Spain's largest game site. Diario AS / MeriStation called it "especially remarkable" and its developer's most standout game by 2002 ([6]). The spotty preservation of reliable Spanish game magazines like Computer Gaming World Spain makes it hard to judge exactly how much coverage the game has. At the very least, if there isn't enough to keep the article mainspaced, I'd appreciate the thing being sent to draft for future development rather than outright erased. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 15:12, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

• I would suggest to send the article into the Draft area, so anybody with the knowledge of Spanish software can improve the article in order to not get its sources listed lost. Roberth Martinez (talk) 22:25, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
• Comment @JimmyBlackwing: Use the Template:Source assess table on the sources. FoxyGrampa75 (talk) 02:48, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
• Keep as creator - based on all the additional work I have put into the article I believe that demonstrates the game's notability. Spanish sources haven't been scrutinised as much within WP:VG as other language sources so I don't think any of these third party sources shouldbe rejected due to not being on the Reliable Sources list. I think together the sources tell a pretty compelling narrative, one which can be bolstered by some contextual sources outlining the state of Alcachofa Soft at the time and how its trajectory was affected by the title.--Coin945 (talk) 00:11, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
• Improve and Keep or Disambiguate Considering the abundance of Spanish references to makes it difficult to warrant this article on the English Wikipedia. Perhaps, if they were translated it would make more sense to Keep. Spy-cicle (talk) 18:29, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Hello there @Spy-cicle:, I have never heard the standard that to be in English Wikipedia the topic had to have enough reliable third-party English sources, only that it had enough reliable third-party sources in general. What is it about Spanish sources in your eyes that makes then less reliable than English ones?--Coin945 (talk) 23:27, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
  • @Coin945: English sources are strongly preferred over Spanish sources. Spanish sources are fine but when most sources are from Spanish it makes it hard verify and harder to meet WP:GNG Spy-cicle (talk) 15:04, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
    • There is no reason to discount Spanish sources:

Sources do not have to be available online or written in English. WP:GNG

Citations to non-English reliable sources are allowed on the English Wikipedia. WP:NOENG

Good reliable Spanish language sources are sufficient to prove notability of the article subject. Pavlor (talk) 05:12, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

• Keep - Coverage in El Mundo and a subsidiary of Diario AS is enough for WP:GNG for me. Do not draftify as the article is presentable. Daß Wölf 06:11, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
• Keep - Reliable third party sources. Stop wasting time with drafts. - hahnchen 10:06, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
• Keep per the RSes that have been dug up. Phediuk (talk) 19:25, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

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.