Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bradley's Toy Money Complete with Game of Banking

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. (non-admin closure) Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:59, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bradley's Toy Money Complete with Game of Banking

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Cannot find any significant coverage in reliable sources for this board game. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:36, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Games, and Products. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:36, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment looks like two previous nominations have failed to delete this in 2009, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bradley's Toy Money Complete with Game Of Banking, which I closed, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bradley's Toy Money Complete with Game Of Banking (2nd nomination). Jclemens (talk) 15:23, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That first close probably could/should have been a soft delete, though it was 15 years ago and maybe the rules around deletion were more lenient. Conyo14 (talk) 18:31, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, we hadn't invented that then, else I would have done it. Jclemens (talk) 21:22, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Fails GNG. Keep per WP:HEY. Guinness did a great job of collecting those ancient journals, enough so that I would consider the article to pass WP:GNG. Conyo14 (talk) 23:19, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I would ask editors who have previously voted to Delete to reconsider the article that I have rewritten. Yes, the original wiki was badly written and was about some collector's single copy of the game, but the original game was actually published in the 1870s and was for many decades considered a valuable educational tool until it was finally discontinued in 1950. Several editions are held in the Smithsonian. I have attempted to source all of this to prove notability. I am sure there must be more sources out there for a game that was available for almost 80 years. If the game survives AfD, I would also suggest changing the article's title to Bradley's Toy Money or Educational Toy Money, since that is what most editions were titled. Guinness323 (talk) 00:08, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Could you provide a couple of reliable sources? I mean saying it's historical isn't actually proof.~~ Conyo14 (talk) 01:39, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:HEY. I think the book sourcing in combination with the old journal publications is enough to pass GNG. Hemiauchenia (talk) 01:38, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging all participants from the first two AFDs: Gordonrox24, ImperatorExercitus, Ron Ritzman, SL93, Jujutacular, SarekOfVulcan, King of Hearts, Ret.Prof. BOZ (talk) 05:04, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per my previous research and recent updates. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:07, 3 November 2024 (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.