Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SuperTuxKart

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 consensus for keep . Non-admin closure. ¨¨ victor falk 15:56, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SuperTuxKart

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

Non-notable alpha software. All the references are to the developers' own logs and release notes. Psychonaut (talk) 23:14, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, or more specifically the lack of non-trivial coverage by reliable third party publishers. TuxKart should be deleted as well. JBsupreme (talk) 23:30, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Notable as a non-trivial inclusion in most Linux distros. And mildly notable for it's participation in Happy Penguin's GotM project. However, A merge between this and Tuxkart would probably make sense, they're basically different editions of the same game. APL (talk) 23:56, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- That is nice and all, but how does that fit into the framework of our notability guidelines? Are you finding any evidence of non-trivial coverage of this specific game title from reliable third party sources? JBsupreme (talk) 00:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I mentioned inclusion in distros as distribution "via a medium which is both respected and independent of the creators..." and which exercises some level editorial oversight. .(It also appears on Apple.Com for whatever that's worth.)APL (talk) 03:53, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - The content of the Apple blurb is self-published. It says: "... we want to make the game fun more than we want to make it realistic." Notice the word "we". SharkD Talk 08:47, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. Nifboy (talk) 00:56, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. — Gongshow ^Talk 01:00, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this game. Joe Chill (talk) 03:32, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've also added a reference to Full Circle Magazine. APL (talk) 03:53, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak~~ keep or merge to Mario Kart as a fangame. Besides the coverage found by User:APL(link see p. 31), it's also covered here; while this review is written on a download page, it's clearly written by their staff, not copied, as they say it's a fangame and give their impressions on it. The same observation applies to the Softonic review. It is also included in the "best 85 free games" (not limited to Linux ones) in de:PC-Welt at position 70 (link, direct link to blurb. Also reviewed in a Download Squad entry, which is a syndcated blog owned by AOL (so, not self-pub). Pcap ping 09:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Also covered in a round-up article in Linux Journal. This newsletter indicates that it was covered in issue 106 of Linux Format as well (subscription needed for full text of the magazine, but a 5-paragraph coverage was reproduced in the newsletter itself). There's also a paragraph about it in this story on Foresight Linux Kid's Edition. There's enough material in all these independent takes on it for a decent write-up here. Pcap ping 09:26, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - several Linux-based reliable sources have been posted. --Teancum (talk) 12:45, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - It is included with many Linux distributions, and has several sources. If worse comes to worse, at least merge it with TuxKart.
- I would just like to add, look at the reception section for proof of notability.Comrade Hamish Wilson (talk) 00:47, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - There are already many good arguments here, I might only add that it is a Linux and free software classic. Comrade Graham (talk) 21:04, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Pcap's sources seem OK. None of the other arguments are very good. SharkD Talk 08:51, 1 February 2010 (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.