- Jailbreak (Roblox) (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)
While seemingly well developed and sourced on the surface, I do not believe there is enoughWP:SIGCOV of the game itself - independent from coverage or interviews of one specific developer,Alex Balfanz, and does not establish notability of the game itself perWP:NOTINHERITED - to warrant a separate article fromList of Roblox games. Multiple sources on the article are of dubious reliability if not completely unreliable (Digiday, Entertainment Focus, and the Roblox Realm 3 book), primary sourcing, and all sources used in the Reception section - something that I think would require alot of strong sourcing to warrant a split from the well-developed list article entry perWP:NOPAGE andWP:MERGEREASON - is actually just trivial coverage.
I also want to point out a few quality issues that make me seriously doubt the integrity of this article. The article phrase "Jailbreak has had a large margin of positive feedback and reviews from critics" cannot be reasonably made when every critical statement about the game is trivial, from an unreliable source, or from the context of an interview/coverage of one of the games developers. This arguably falls underWP:SYNTH andWP:UNDUEWEIGHT being given towards low quality sources. "A Discord forum was established for players to discuss about the game and report game issues": what is a "Discord forum"? They're called servers. All coverage of the NASCAR partnership is UNDUE as it is exclusively cited to primary sourcing from the NASCAR website itself not counting Digiday which does not appear to be areliable source. If kept the article needs a look from more experienced editors and drastically improved.
All in all, I do not think that there is enough coverage of the game itself, in reliable sources (particularly those listed atWP:RSP andWP:VG/S, especially) to establish independentnotability and separation fromList of Roblox games. Which I would consider the bar of notability for Roblox games to be way higher when the list already requires notability to begin with andWP:NOPAGE +WP:MERGEREASON exist. Everything about the game that is noteworthy and well sourced is already covered in the list article, which I recommend either a merge or redirect to.λNegativeMP106:25, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in thelist of Video games-related deletion discussions.λNegativeMP106:25, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect toList of Roblox games#Jailbreak - oh boy, the rationale is almost longer than the article itself. But the current state of the article or its writing quality doesn't matter except for cleanup purposes perWP:NEXIST, anyone can go andfix that, so what is really important here is whether it passesWP:GNG. The CNBC article is good, but the others are from iffy/unreliable sources. It's yet another example of a barely-notable Roblox game that gotsome mentions, but not enough for its own article.ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ)06:58, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Just to clarify, I brought up the quality concerns in the first place as it made me raise my eyebrows in multiple ways that made me doubt the integrity of this articles existence in the first place. I typically do not concern myself with article quality as part of a deletion rationale over notability.λNegativeMP107:02, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I originally made this as a userpage, then a draft and now a article, I didn’t know the reliability of some sources, but I gave myopinion on this.rave (talk)13:32, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong draftify and then merge with Draft:Jailbreak (Roblox) - Instead of everyone normally just debating to redirect the game toList of Roblox games, I'd feel like it's more better if you draftifiedJailbreak and then merged it withDraft:Jailbreak (Roblox) because if we draftified it then that'll give the page more time to improve it's SIGCOV, notability and reliability before it can be moved back into mainspace and I'm also suggesting to merge it with Draft:Jailbreak (Roblox) to avoid confusion of it being a duplicate/copy.MrDevolver (talk)07:35, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- SeeWP:AKON. Arguments like "it can gain notability as a draft" are iffy because if you can't prove it during this AfD, standing on its own as an article is unlikely.ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ)08:05, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- This is so confusing, is it because the sources aren’t reliable? If it’s reliable sources then can’t the unreliable sources be removed? I'm relatively new to this, I thought if it had sources that go in-depth, at least have a section on the topic, and is independent of the subject then it’s good, what sources are unreliable? If the unreliable sources are removed can the article be notable or no? I’m attempting to get an answer here because this is weird to me.rave (talk)15:46, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- When you take out the sources deemed unreliable by the community (Business Insider and VentureBeat), I don't think there are enough to pass theWP:GNG. That's the main problem here.ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ)16:58, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Wait so the problem is notability? I thought it was notable because the sources on list of Roblox for Jailbreak were there so I used them, I didn’t know that they were unreliable? Sorry for the mistakes though, really! Is there really anything that could be done to improve this or is just likely deleted, redirected or drafted?rave (talk)11:30, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - First of all, There are sources here that are reliable and trustworthy sources such asBusiness Insider,New York Times,Bloomberg News, andCNBC, all these sources mentioned here don’t give Jailbreak a mention inside their own articles, some have a section or part of the article being about the game and other sources cover the entire game as a whole. Yes, there is some sources out of the ones I mentioned thatMIGHT be considered unreliable, but a few of them have a section that goes in-depth into the subject,Entertainment-Focus is an interview but the source isn’t even made by asimo3089, badcc or anyone in the Badimo group, It’s made by a game interviewer who has made various game related articles on the website, this is a secondary and independent source,WP:Interview says that reliable interview sources should largely be used for facts. The "discord forum" and "Jailbreak has a large margin.." is yes, all misleading information since it breaksWP:SYNTH andWP:UNDUE but these can be easily fixed or removed. Even though NASCAR is a primary source, that can be removed easily. I think the most that could be done is fix this article a large amount and possibly remove some sourced material.rave (talk)12:30, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- also draftify is a option that’s alrightrave (talk)12:33, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- And the Digiday and Roblox Realm Book can be unreliable (especially the realm book since it’s possiblyLLM generated with its use of AI art and dubious writing) and the Digiday is kind of mostly about the NASCAR event and not the game itself.rave (talk)12:37, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Note that this editor is the article creator which should be kept in mind for any assessment of consensus.Athanelar (talk)16:11, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Draftify and considerRedirect to list of Roblox games. The reason this article is in mainspace at all is because ofthis teahouse thread whereUser:GarethBaloney encouraged RaveCrowny to 'be bold' and move their article directly to mainspace which I think was bad advice. RaveCrowny's account is too new to create articles directly in mainspace and that restriction exists for a reason, they should have followed the proper AfC procedure and submitted the article for review, and in any case I don't thinkWP:BOLD applies to unilaterally publishing an unreviewed draft.Athanelar (talk)16:10, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Whoops.GarethBaloney (talk)16:12, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I just thought a extended confirmed account knew what they were doing, didn’t know I did something probably stupid.rave (talk)16:20, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Draftify. Agreed with Athanelar; that was not good advice to give to a newbie. Rave, don't blame yourself for this either; a lot of more experienced editors have had this happen to them too (including myself; seethe AfD). In my opinion, when there's a subject-specific notability guideline that may be different from GNG, notability may be one of the hardest things for new editors to get their heads around. Itdefinitely took me a while to figure it out. I would suggest asking others atWT:VG for their thoughts if you're unsure. For future reference, the notability guidelines for video games are explained atWP:NVG.Gommeh 📖 🎮17:04, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Athanelar,autoconfirmed accounts can make articles in Mainspace, which Rave is a member of.45dogs (they/them)(talk page)07:00, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- My mistake, I didn't realise rave was AC when the article was moved. Nevertheless I don't think as a relatively new editor they should've been encouraged to publish the article without review.Athanelar (talk)14:33, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I do agree it would have been best to go through the AFC process, though the process might have let it through anyways.45dogs (they/them)(talk page)17:35, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Draftify. I know I’m not too experienced (been here for half a year now I believe), but I never thought games on a video game would be classified as possible for a Wikipedia page, if so then what stops other games on Roblox or even other games being included, perhaps I’m looking at this from a wrong angle but it would seem kind of Promotion-esque, if I was a user of Roblox (which I certainly am not but if I were) seeing a game which has a Wikipedia page would somewhat “entice” me, so perhaps I’m wrong and if so then please tell me but this seems somewhat not Wikipedia-esque. (Correct me if I’m wrong)”Mwen Sé Kéyòl Translator-a (talk)15:32, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- *DraftifyMwen Sé Kéyòl Translator-a (talk)15:32, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
