Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jackpot World
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Jackpot World (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable mobile game. Sourcing about the game itself leans heavily to primary sources, low-quality secondary blog coverage or user-generated social media and influencer youtube videos. The more reliable coverage about SpinX and their business activities, such as from GameDeveloper, Nikkei, or Reuters, barely mentions Jackpot World. May be one to consider framing as notability for a WP:CORP and not for the game itself. I accept the game itself is quite popular but there isn't a lot of mainstream coverage on it from what I can see. VRXCES (talk) 04:47, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. VRXCES (talk) 04:47, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to Netmarble. Agree with nom that Jackpot World is poorly covered in RS, failing WP:GNG. Developer is covered, although questionably well enough for an WP:NCORP pass, but in any case doesn't have an article, so redirect to parent company of developer. ~ A412 talk! 19:03, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
- A quick look shows that the Netmarble article doesn't mention SpinX, but it easily could: [1] [2] [3] [4] ~ A412 talk! 19:09, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
- That seems appropriate to me. VRXCES (talk) 04:44, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your suggestions. After careful consideration, I also agree that "Redirect to Netmarble" makes more sense. JulieBole (talk) 07:47, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
- I've played this game for years and I think it should be kept. It was released by the publisher before it was acquired. 42.200.218.17 (talk) 03:04, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your thoughts. You might like to put 'keep' in bold at the front of your message to better signal your vote on the deletion discussion. It isn't necessary but can help to provide a policy reason why you vote one way or another in a deletion discussion. VRXCES (talk) 03:18, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 09:30, 18 November 2024 (UTC)