Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Real Flight Simulator

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. Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 21:24, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Real Flight Simulator

[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)

Rationale Non-notable per WP:GNG. Sourcing only supported by user-generated review scores.

Source search: No MobyGames page. Nothing on the reliable sources search engine. Metacritic has no reviews for the title. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 23:44, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Aviation. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 00:34, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No coverage in reliable sources. ~ A412 ^talk! 19:42, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dekete - besides the lack of significant coverage, it appears to have been written with generative AI. Bearian (talk) 06:08, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I write it by myself, but still, close paraphrasing. Protoeus (talk) 22:46, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is just a barebones article with typos, a gAI article would typically be overly detailed and filled with redundant information. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 10:23, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The article fails to meet the notability criteria outlined in WP:GNG due to a lack of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. The sourcing relies on user-generated reviews, and a search for reliable sources (e.g., MobyGames, Metacritic) yields no substantial results. Without in-depth coverage from credible sources, the subject does not warrant an article on Wikipedia. Additionally, concerns about close paraphrasing and overall content quality further support deletion.--Abhey City (talk) 14:58, 25 January 2025 (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.