Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OurWorld!

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. -- Cirt (talk) 16:25, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OurWorld!

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

Does not seem to meet the notability guidelines. (IP contested prod) OSborn^arf_contribs. 03:55, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. -- OSborn^arf_contribs. 03:56, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 20:00, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:21, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Conditional keep; while I only found a few reliable sources that covered it, it may have potential to be notable. If in a month the sources turn out to not be adequate, deletion would be fair. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 23:00, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - First, I recommend scrapping the MMOHut reference, as its not a site deemed reliable (WP:VG/RS). I did find a solid review at Gamezebo and a short article at Joystiq which I believe is sufficient for WP:Notability. Marasmusine (talk) 13:09, 6 March 2011 (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.