- 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 no consensus. Additional sources have been found but several of the 'keep' comments are not well based on policy and there is a question about the depth of coverage. Just Chilling ( talk) 15:21, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
Yuzu (emulator)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Yuzu (emulator) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No evidence of any real notability, just another emulator. Slatersteven ( talk) 13:32, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz ( talk) 13:52, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz ( talk) 13:52, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz ( talk) 13:52, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
- Delete - agree with nom MaskedSinger ( talk) 17:14, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
- Delete The references in the article don't demonstrate WP:SIGCOV and my standard BEFORE (newspapers.com, Google News, Google Books, JSTOR) reveal nothing not contained therein. Fails GNG. Chetsford ( talk) 00:22, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- Delete, per my same argument over at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/XQEMU - not enough reliable sources and WP:NOTJUSTYET/WP:TOOSOON. Until these two emulators get significant coverage, it's highly unlikely a Wikipedia article about that emulator is going to survive. theinstantmatrix ( talk) 19:09, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
- @ Theinstantmatrix: I've gathered several sources below if you would like to look at them below and potentially reevaluate your vote. There are more than that, such as Rappler and The Next Web, but I kept it to 10 in my comment. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 21:09, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- Strong Keep: I'm seeing plenty of reliable sources discussing yuzu (edit: and providing coverage in sufficiently significant depth), including PC Gamer ( twice), Gizmodo, HotHardware, eTeknix, Kotaku, TechSpot, Game Revolution, Tom's Guide, Forbes, etc. I'm extremely skeptical that the nonimator performed even cursory WP:BEFORE. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 18:22, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
- Those are reliable, but not significant. It's a case of
WP:TOOSOON.
ZXCVBNM (
TALK) 01:02, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- They're clearly, unequivocally significant per
WP:GNG; literally every single one of those articles features yuzu as its main subject, and that's just what I found through 6 minutes of searching online. This emulator has received significant coverage in a number of articles from several reliable, independent sources since its creation, and as
Dream Focus aptly notes,
WP:TOOSOON makes absolutely no sense here.
TheTechnician27
(Talk page) 02:40, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- "Significant" does not mean that a prominent site mentioned it. That's a reliable source, but a decent amount has to be written on the subject that goes beyond just mentioning it and what it does. I'm not seeing that. Also, Dream Focus votes Keep on almost everything regardless of merit, so I wouldn't take his word as gospel with regards to policy and you should read it yourself.
ZXCVBNM (
TALK) 03:52, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- What's with this personal insult? I clicked upon all the links posted and saw significant coverage. This isn't just announcements about it, but also mentions of when they made the bestselling game on the Switch run perfectly on it, etc. So over a period of time it still gets mentioned. Significant is context not just the number of words.
Dream Focus 11:51, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- It's true that significance is not 100% guaranteed to be based on wordcount, but it almost always is. Usually very short articles don't indicate significant coverage, because significant coverage spends a long time talking about the subject and going in-depth. ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 13:05, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- "and you should read [the policy] yourself" I already had when I agreed with Dream Focus, so I don't understand your baseless assumption that I hadn't. Moreover, I'm aware that Dream Focus is an inclusionist (I should note that I'm usually not); that doesn't in any way detract from the merit of their argument. I'm just going to get this out of the way so I can stop arguing against these erroneous, red herring definitions of 'significant': ""Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material." And like that, we have at least 10 different articles from reliable, independent sources featuring this emulator as their primary (and, for most of them, only) subject; regardless of their shorter-than-average length, each of them clearly exceeds a 'trivial mention' and constitutes significant coverage. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 13:36, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- What's with this personal insult? I clicked upon all the links posted and saw significant coverage. This isn't just announcements about it, but also mentions of when they made the bestselling game on the Switch run perfectly on it, etc. So over a period of time it still gets mentioned. Significant is context not just the number of words.
Dream Focus 11:51, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- "Significant" mean more then a couple of paragraphs that say "this is coming soon".
Slatersteven (
talk) 09:25, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- I don't know how many of those articles you actually read or even clicked on, but half of the 10 I presented cover progress being made on the emulator. Moreover, the other five are still significant coverage of the then-upcoming emulator; that it was in its infancy doesn't somehow render its coverage insignificant.
TheTechnician27
(Talk page) 13:36, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
-
wp:crystal may also come into this. Do you have anything that indicates it is notable now?
Slatersteven (
talk) 18:16, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- This is not a crystal ball situation since as I have said, some of the sources given are after it was developed, it getting coverage for being able to run Super Mario Odyssey.
Dream Focus 19:23, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- Then there is a serious problem with our article, as it does not give any release date and implies it is in fact still largely in development. Its website however does not imply it "yuzu is an experimental open-source".
Slatersteven (
talk) 19:34, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- It is still in development (which the website explains had you read into the second paragraph: "[...] with builds actively maintained [...]"). WP:CRYSTAL – as Dream Focus once again aptly points out – in absolutely no way applies here as you speciously assert, because not a single word of the existing article is making any sort of speculation on yuzu's development, and the subject's coverage at this point extends beyond just an announcement of its development's commencement. Please actually read the policies you're citing. "Do you have anything that indicates it is notable now?" Not only do you seem to have a tenuous grasp on what constitutes "significant coverage" and what WP:CRYSTAL is, but you also seem to fail to realize that notability is not temporary, making the question "is it notable now?" entirely irrelevant (if not completely nonsensical) in the context of Wikipedia's notability policy. Moreover, the article clearly meets WP:SUSTAINED as demonstrated by the sources above. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 20:50, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- Then there is a serious problem with our article, as it does not give any release date and implies it is in fact still largely in development. Its website however does not imply it "yuzu is an experimental open-source".
Slatersteven (
talk) 19:34, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- This is not a crystal ball situation since as I have said, some of the sources given are after it was developed, it getting coverage for being able to run Super Mario Odyssey.
Dream Focus 19:23, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
-
wp:crystal may also come into this. Do you have anything that indicates it is notable now?
Slatersteven (
talk) 18:16, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- I don't know how many of those articles you actually read or even clicked on, but half of the 10 I presented cover progress being made on the emulator. Moreover, the other five are still significant coverage of the then-upcoming emulator; that it was in its infancy doesn't somehow render its coverage insignificant.
TheTechnician27
(Talk page) 13:36, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- "Significant" does not mean that a prominent site mentioned it. That's a reliable source, but a decent amount has to be written on the subject that goes beyond just mentioning it and what it does. I'm not seeing that. Also, Dream Focus votes Keep on almost everything regardless of merit, so I wouldn't take his word as gospel with regards to policy and you should read it yourself.
ZXCVBNM (
TALK) 03:52, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- They're clearly, unequivocally significant per
WP:GNG; literally every single one of those articles features yuzu as its main subject, and that's just what I found through 6 minutes of searching online. This emulator has received significant coverage in a number of articles from several reliable, independent sources since its creation, and as
Dream Focus aptly notes,
WP:TOOSOON makes absolutely no sense here.
TheTechnician27
(Talk page) 02:40, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- Those are reliable, but not significant. It's a case of
WP:TOOSOON.
ZXCVBNM (
TALK) 01:02, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:TOOSOON. It may become notable enough for an article in the future. ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 01:02, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- Keep Clicking on the reliable sources found by TheTechnician27 I see some give significant coverage so this easily passes the general notability guidelines. The too soon arguments makes no sense since its already out, and has been talked about for over a year. Dream Focus 01:50, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- There is no deadline on how soon is too soon. Only that it has to be enough to get significant coverage. Significant as in: something more than "oh hey, this exists, check it out" which those articles are.
ZXCVBNM (
TALK) 03:50, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- "Too soon" is just an essay, not a guideline or policy. And it has ample coverage now Dream Focus 19:24, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- There is no deadline on how soon is too soon. Only that it has to be enough to get significant coverage. Significant as in: something more than "oh hey, this exists, check it out" which those articles are.
ZXCVBNM (
TALK) 03:50, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:17, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:17, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- Keep but heavily rework the article to be at the very least longer than a stub, otherwise Move to draftspace. TheTechnician27 has provided plenty of reliable sources proving and establishing notability but the article itself does not reflect this, since right now it's basically just "this thing exists". -- letcreate123 ( talk) 16:46, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
- Delete due to lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. Woodroar ( talk) 02:24, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
- Keep Yuzu was the first emulator and is the one currently furthest along in development. Usually an emulator remains obscure until it can run full games not available on any other platform. The emulator is just now at that stage and actively being developed, I think the article right on time, not too soon. Lunamoff ( talk) 04:04, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
- Keep Yuzu can run Super Mario Odyssey, so that is notable. It is not perfectly running though. -- Frmorrison ( talk) 22:24, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
- Keep why delete it? Yuzu already exists, you can downlad a stable version of it (not alpha or beta), and it is not vaporware, its not something like 6G wireless networks, that article was deleted because we don't know if 6G is going to be a thing, specially if 5g succeeds on its mission, unlike 4g. Pancho507 ( talk) 02:51, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
- Keep, Yuzu has sufficient RS and stable version, really Dream Focus's comment are noteworthy for a keep vote. Meeanaya ( talk) 07:32, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
- Keep I think that there is enough significant coverage in reliable sources, but I think the article should be expanded and reworked to make it longer than a stub. Taewangkorea ( talk) 11:37, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
- 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.