Blue's News – Deletion endorsed, with the deleting admin urged not to use the phrase "speedy delete" to close an AfD under similar circumstances. Those who argue that this is not an appropriate A7 candidate are correct, but given that the AfD ran for 8 days with no objection to deletion, this is not really an A7 deletion but a clumsily closed AfD. – Chick Bowen05:28, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it.
Bluesnews.com is a very notable PC-Gaming news website with accessible archives dating to 1996. 3rd party references are hard to find because of the common words used in its name. Searching for Blue's News (even in quotes) returns hundreds of thousands of unrelated results and searching for bluesnews.com returns hundreds of thousands of pages linking to Blue's News articles. Due to Blue's News' long history many 3rd party references are likely lost because they existed over 10 years ago. Blue's News is visited and commented on by many industry insiders (developers, producers, marketers, even CEOs) who are verified and given a special green nametag. An example of its prevalence in the PC Gaming industry can be seen in this Game Developer's Forum 2007 video (http://www.gamershell.com/download_19532.shtml) in Budapest where a Crytek representative mentions Blue's News by name (without prior explanation) at 13:44 (video is in Polish language until the end where English is used).
The simple nature of Blue's News' design and function (which has barely changed in over 10 years) gives 3rd parties little to mention directly but this does not diminish the site's notability. The same reasons that have kept the Shacknews article from deletion twice can be used to defend Blue's News.
Endorse closure. The article that was deleted made no assertion of notability and commenters were unable to find references to prove the contrary. It might be hard to find sources, but we need at least some of them to verify the contents of the article and a claim of notability that fits WP:WEB would increase the chances of the article being kept too. - Mgm|(talk)08:54, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
On the deletion review page, there is an instruction "Deletion Review is to be used where someone is unable to resolve the issue in discussion with the administrator (or other editor) in question. This should be attempted first – courteously invite the admin to take a second look". I haven't noticed this discussion taking place. While I'm aware that some users consider this an optional step, I would appreciate if the nominator could please explain why he omitted it (or, if there was a discussion that I missed, point it out)? Stifle (talk) 09:16, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Those google book links are largely trivial. If the weblinks contain enough information, though, I'd be happy to restore to userspace to see if this can be done. - Mgm|(talk)18:32, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Overturn, gnews hits from major publishers dating back more than 10 years demonstrate that this site was being referred to as a major one in it's field. --Stormie (talk) 05:44, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
