Talk:Mario Kart: Source

Important

The development of Mario Kart: Source has been stopped in 2012. Creators of the project have released the source code.

• More info: The End - Sources Released news

The article needs to be updated. 178.183.182.206 (talk) 00:59, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Object to Deletion

This page shouldn't be deleted as all the other Source game mods are up as well like Synergy, Black Mesa, GoldenEye: Source, Garry's Mod etc and if this article gets deleted than it should eb that those others that I mentioned should be delted as they come under the same circumstances as this --VitasV (talk) 01:03, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Other articles are totally irrelevant. Without reliable third party sources to establish notability, no article. Rehevkor ✉ 01:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Irrelvant how? They come under the same category as this article. I've fixed it up anyway so the deletion should be removed. Also what's no non-stub? --VitasV (talk) 01:18, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Because those articles don't automatically make this one notable. You have not addressed the number one issue, notability. A non-stub article is an article that has decent length with reliably sourced material. If you cut out all the game guide information, indiscriminate lists, and incorporate what sourced info you can find, you'll likely have an article no more than a paragraph long, 2 tops. Rehevkor ✉ 01:25, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Well I've removed the game guide information. Notabillity I've added. --VitasV (talk) 01:27, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Almost every section is pretty much entirely game guide information. And where, pray tell, have you established notability? Notability must be established through reliable, third party sources. Please take a read of WP:NOTABILITY. Rehevkor ✉ 01:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

How is it a game guide anymore? Also you can help as well to improve it if can! --VitasV (talk) 01:36, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

The "Playable characters", "Playable Game Modes" and "Playable Maps" sections are almost exclusively game guide information. It's an encyclopaedia, remember, not a indiscriminate collection of information. It's not a subject I really know much about. I'm curious as to why you're so determined this should have an article anyway? Rehevkor ✉ 01:42, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

But all other Mario Kart game articles have them listed as well so if they're classified as game guides then why are they still up. --VitasV (talk) 01:50, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Because they're bad articles? I dunno, ask them. They may still be there because they have established notability. Rehevkor ✉ 01:55, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

So all I have to do is add references and then this article wont get deleted as I've changed it so it's not like a game guide. --VitasV (talk) 01:58, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Still looks pretty game guidey to me. Simple lists of maps/characters are just that. With the right sources, sure, but it could still be deleted on other counts. Rehevkor ✉ 02:07, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources will get added. Game guidey I beleive is not neccessary since heaps of game articles on wikipedia are like this so until those become fixed then the whole questioning about game guidy is irrelevant. Plus game guidy is telling how to do it as this tells what will be in it which is not game guide. --VitasV (talk) 02:10, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

As I said above, other article are totally irrelevant here. Just because they don't follow guidelines doesn't mean this article shouldn't. And game guide information is unencyclopaedic, again, as I said before. You really should concentrate on addressing the issue of notability though, as the burden of proof is on you to establish it. Rehevkor ✉ 02:17, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

There! Found some realiable sources of notability. Now the article doesn't have to be deleted. I'll remove the notice now. --VitasV (talk) 07:40, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

That's not gunna cut it, passing mentions and forum sources are not reliable, take a look at WP:GNG, "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article.", this is something that has *not* been addressed. Rehevkor ✉ 14:14, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Mentions! Isn't that what sources are? The GoldenEye: Source article has heaps of mentions. Strange how it's not being deleted. --VitasV (talk) 00:31, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

For the eight billionth time, that article has nothing to do with this one! And reliable sources to satisfy notability guidelines need to have a lot more than a passing mention, in fact, they need "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject," (emphasis mine). Rehevkor ✉ 14:43, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I regret to see that Vitas is out here, too, wrecking things with his insanity. Should you come by the forum, you'd find that not everybody likes him. If anyone at all. As for notability.. I do hope the following few URLS are enough.

• http://nintendo.joystiq.com/2009/01/22/mario-kart-source-made-by-fans-for-fans/
• http://www.vooks.net/modules.php?module=article&id=13694
• http://computerfinance.net/mario-kart-source-pc-mod-uses-the-best-parts-of-each-mk-game/
• http://game.blogdig.net/archives/articles/January2009/22/Mario_Kart__Source_PC_mod_uses__the_best_parts_of_each__MK_game.html

I've searched around for articles, and these were a few I found.. I think one or two may be duplicating each other, tho. I hope you'll excuse Vitas for being an idiot in general, and also for my.. I assume incorrect way of 'talking'. This would be the first time on a talk page, and while I've read the guidelines, I'm afraid I probably made some mistake anyway. -- SpeedyDVV (talk) 15:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Citation 6 has nothing to do with the game

Citation 6 is about a game where people play as guards on the berlin wall and angry german media. This source has nothing to do with Mario Kart. 84.44.231.161 (talk) 21:44, 7 September 2016 (UTC)