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 delete per no assertion of notability. —Doug Bell ^talk 16:43, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

S.C.O.U.R.G.E. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Non-notable. Wokinlone 11:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Hmmmm, I have to disagree, If more information on the article was provided (and cited), it could become a well put-together article. :^) §†SupaSoldier†§ 18:16, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete change to Weak Keep per my Comment to Witchinghour: There is indeed no assertion of notability, but a knowledgeable editor or project might be queried to see if they can determine whether it has notability or not; if it does, then keep, otherwise delete. Askari Mark (Talk) 23:01, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep: For the record I don't play the game and I don't even have it installed. I created the article because it is a nethack clone, much like the other games that I have listed in the see also section, all of which don't have any sources listed. Those games are notable just because they are nethack clones. Well this game is a nethack clone and is 3D, while the others are just 2D. I first came across this game thru a british published magazine, that I bought while I was in the U.S. a few years back, so it was mentioned in print at somepoint, I don't have the magazine but now I know that it's called Linux Format [[1]]. I really don't understand what's the beef against this game. so as much a user would go thru the trouble of creating an account just for nominating an article for deletion, is there something going on that I'm not aware of? thanx. --Witchinghour 01:36, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Then you may want to clarify in the article that it is the only(?) 3D clone, which would give it at least a statement of notoriety. Askari Mark (Talk) 02:07, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This game is NOT a NetHack clone. The only thing this game and NetHack have in common is being roguelikes. Everything else is completely different. 65.99.214.90 22:45, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as it stands now. There have been requests on the talk page asking for some sort of source to indicate the notability, and it has not been forthcoming. Joyous! | Talk 23:28, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This might be an up-and-coming game, but from the sources provided here, there is nothing to show that. Consider re-creating this article if evidence can be provided to show either (1) this game is judged by reliable sources to be better than others currently out there, or (2) this game is widely played. EdJohnston 19:50, 20 February 2007 (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.