Talk:Mob Wars

Deletion Rejected

Mob Wars is notable. It's received secondary source/press coverage here: [1], [2], [3]. It's a very popular game, 2.5M active users as of August according to the Venture Beat article, and has spawned a number of forums dedicated to it.

The article certainly needs to be fleshed out, but this is pretty notable for an internet-based game. At least move this to an AfD if you disagree, but this shouldn't be marked for speedy. And this from a guy who marks everything as speedy :-) --Mr. Vernon (talk) 01:11, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

• Nothing in the article about this. andy (talk) 01:16, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Then it's a reason to flesh out the article. I'll add it, if it will help. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 01:21, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Notability

An admin, User:Nancy, already declined the speedy request last year in revision 259873489. Can we get a final call on this? --Mr. Vernon (talk) 08:33, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I see that this article has two, maybe one source. WP:N requires that an article have significant coverage in reliable sources independent from the subject, aka, unaffiliated.

• [4] - Unaffialeted.

• [5] - Not unaffilitated.

• [6]. Possibly a reliabe source, definitely independent, or, unaffiated.

Two sources is hardly significant.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 09:03, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Allfacebook.com is part of Social Times (as it says on the site); it's not affiliated with Facebook or the Mob Wars developer, and therefore it would seem to be unaffiliated. In any case, notability is asserted, and per WP:CSD this disqualifies it from CSD. This is why we have the AfD process. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 09:12, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I have removed the speedy & hangon tags from the article. This is a matter that should be decided at WP:AFD not via speedy because as Mr. Vernon points out above:

1. A speedy deletion request on the grounds of notability has already been declined thus making the article ineligible for another attempt.
2. Notability is very clearly asserted. Whether it is enough for inclusion is a matter for a deletion discussion.

Final note to Mr Vernon - it would have been fine for you to remove the speedy tag yourself as you are not the creator of the article and so long as you explained your rationale it would be as valid as had an admin done it - be bold!! Cheers, Nancy ^talk 09:22, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Great Train Robbery

I added the details for the Great Train Robbery. I'm sure there's more jobs but I am also not at a level to add them. When I am, I will though. Aspensti (talk) 00:27, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

POV/Libelous material

Just removed so Libelous material. Sorry wasn't logged in at the time. Alans1977 (talk) 19:44, 28 February 2013 (UTC)