This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pokémon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Pokémon universe on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PokémonWikipedia:WikiProject PokémonTemplate:WikiProject PokémonPokémon articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... (This article does not heavily focus on the Pokemon company itself, as it has data going into locations, venue, and reception, as well as the history behind it.) --Lucasstar1 (talk) 19:54, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, notability doesn't come from inherent significance, but from significant coverage in multiple reliable sources (aside from, to my great chagrin, some topics that attain automatic notability, mainly geographical and historical ones). If you can include enough of those (suggestions: [1][2][3][4][5][6]), you should be okay. Article deletion independent of sourcing really only comes into play when an article's subject is deemed too closely overlapping of another one that already has an article, and that's not the case here. Tezero (talk) 02:17, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
