Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Superweapons of Ace Combat

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Randomran (talk | contribs) at 20:55, 27 May 2008 (→Superweapons of Ace Combat). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Superweapons of Ace Combat

Superweapons of Ace Combat (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

No assertion of notability is in this article, and no assertion of notability seems possible. This would require research from reliable third party resources, and this article can only offer research from the game itself. That constitutes original research. As such, violates WP:N, WP:OR, and WP:NN. Also see WP:GAMECRUFT #3 about lists of weapons being unsuitable for inclusion in wikipedia. Randomran (talk) 15:13, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's generally really tough to save weapons articles and they usually get deleted. But one thing that tends to stand up well in wikipedia is lists of characters. If you combined all of them into "list of characters in Ace Combat", I bet you'd have a stronger article altogether. That could incorporate the countries, the organizations, and maybe a brief note about where they're all situated (the map). That's why I recommended the weapons article for deletion, but felt that the other articles deserved a fair chance at cleanup. Randomran (talk) 22:52, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your reliable sources are strategy guides on the game, which certainly are reliable, but are not independent of the topic and show no critical reception; ergo, they do not assert any notability for the topic. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 21:58, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The main guideline was there long before I even first saw it. "The HP or weight class of a character is not important to the article; neither are all the weapons available in a game." For all your assertions that this is notable, you provide no demonstrable proof that this should override the general rule that we don't do articles about lists of weapons. As shown by Sephiroth, first party sources cannot prove notability otherwise everything in the world would be notable. Randomran (talk) 23:15, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • In some games perhaps, but not games that have things like "Combat" in the title. Given time, somone going through back issues of game magazines, is likely to find commentary on the weapons of the game. In any event, when the article is not a copy vio and a legitimate redirect location exists, AfD is not the right venue. Any article created in good faith represents a legitimate search term and so there is no reason for outright deletion here. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 16:00, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • It sounds to me like you have a problem with deletion policy in general. You're entitled to the opinion that all articles created in good faith should be immune to deletion. But then that opinion should go up the ladder to wikipedia policymakers. AFDs are about enforcing policy, not criticizing or making policy. Randomran (talk) 18:51, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just because the community might engage in edit wars, it doesn't invalidate the 3RR. Just because the community might love pictures, it doesn't invalidate that wikipedia follows copyright laws. Just because the community might add advertising, it doesn't invalidate the rule against ads. Just because the community adds non-notable information, it doesn't mean the notability requirement is invalid. Just because the community reads articles that eventually get deleted, it doesn't invalidate the deletion mechanism. Randomran (talk) 18:53, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Edit warring is an example of bad faith editing and is not fair to compare with the creation of these articles in good faith. Have you notified the various editors of this notable article to participate in this AfD? If you haven't, then please do so, as we should hear from them as to why they believe this article should be kept. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 18:59, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment We don't make subjective assessments of notability. The standard for notability is the same across all wikipedia articles. Please see the general notability guideline. If there weapons are so notable, you should be able to find journalists or scholars who have written about the superweapons of ace combat. Randomran (talk) 17:15, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Superweapons_of_Ace_Combat&oldid=215355622"