Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sloshball (2nd nomination)

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. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:55, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sloshball

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

Non-notable drinking game. No reliable sources cited; everything is from a blog, from someone promoting the "sport" for business purposes, or another wiki. Nothing else from reliable sources indicates any sort of widespread recognition, as opposed to beer pong or cornhole. (Contested speedy.) - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 23:58, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Unless reliable sources can be found. Narthring (talk • contribs) 02:52, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Reluctant keep. Google gives a respectable number of hits. Yes, most of these hits are on blogs but the point is that they are lots of different blogs and they all use the term as though it was well-established. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:42, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Lots of different blogs" just means "lots of different unreliable sources." There's not a critical mass of blogs, wikis and such that suddenly renders them reliable. There has to be some truly reliable sources, and I couldn't find anything that qualifies in a Google search. BTW, an article on this subject was already deleted by AfD once; I have no way of looking at the old version, since I am not an admin, so I don't know if this is a re-creation of that or not. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 15:43, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:40, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A Google search confirms what Realkyhick is saying: no reliable sources with significant coverage. First Light (talk) 04:01, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This game does have widespread play, you can google image search it or even youtube it. Furthermore, the images and videos can be found from across the country, more notably on the coasts. In reference to reliable sources, what exactly do you expect for a drinking game? a published manual? Its very clear that this game exists and is a cultural phenomenon, despite not being as popular as beer pong or cornhole. And don't primary sources, such as video and images count as reliable? These videos weren't faked.. also, I find validity in the fact that across websites the rules of the game are nearly identical. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.76.157.189 (talk) 19:56, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You really need to read Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. Your post could be used as a textbook example showing numerous arguments that really don't fly around here. Most importantly, no one is disputing that the game exists; what is under dispute is whether it is notable. We measure notability by third-party sources. "Number of YouTube videos" just doesn't cut it. Powers ^T 00:18, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Had been previously nominated with a result of "delete".RussianReversal (talk) 20:54, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete still nothing that adds up to reliable sources required to meet WP:GNG. Nuttah (talk) 21:10, 30 May 2010 (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.