Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grand Theft Auto clone

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Mz7 (talk) 20:50, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Theft Auto clone

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Grand Theft Auto Clone' is not a genre, and it should not be considered one, it is an ignorant term that game critics use so they don't have to give other open world games which contain vehicles, weapons and cities a higher score. The logic of this page means we should have pages such as 'Doom Clones' and 'Mario Clones', both Grand Theft Auto and other open world sandbox games which contain driving and combat belong in the open world genre. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HateUsernames2014 (talk • contribs)

Strong keep - The term "GTA clone" is well established (beyond the neologism aspect) point in sources and considered a genre by the industry. --MASEM (t) 22:49, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A Google search of the phrase revealed its usage in several legitimate sources (NBC News, The Guardian, IGN, Game Informer, etc.). sixtynine ^{• spill it •} 22:54, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2014 February 8. —cyberbot I ^Notify_Online 23:05, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above; I see a decent number of valid sources in the article already (among the vast amount of refs there). ₆an⁶sh₆ 23:16, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Looks legit to me. Is this a case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT? I agree that it's a bit odd to have an entire article based around the concept of a clone of a video game, especially when Diablo clone and Doom clone are mere redirects, but the article is well-sourced and satisfies the GNG. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:22, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 23:14, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; it's a well-established term whose notable coverage is far too large for a small section. Tezero (talk) 21:12, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep even if we accept the suggestion that it is a ignorant term created by game critics to prevent games from getting a hiher score that GTA that would not be a valid reason for deletion anyway,--174.93.163.194 (talk) 05:05, 12 February 2014 (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.