Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Falldown

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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete -- (☺drini♫|☎) 05:45, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Falldown

A game for the TI-92 calculator that can be downloaded from ticalc. Pilatus 11:35, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - nn CLW 12:07, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. *drew 12:13, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. While they can be fun, free games for calculators are in general not encyclopedically notable. (And I usually find it more fun to program them myself.) Sjakkalle (Check!) 12:59, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
• Merge or keep, no reason given for deletion, why shouldn't users know what kind of games can be played on calculators? Kappa 14:02, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
  • If you'd care to add context in the form of this game's impact on the TI-92 game development community, or this game's fanbase, or some other reason that this isn't one of tens of thousands of more-or-less interchangable freeware games developed for heavily-constrained computer platforms, I'd cheerfully change my vote. Alternately, if you'd like to write an article in general terms about the sorts of freeware games that are developed for graphing calculators, that would be great, too. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 14:26, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Great, so the users are left in ignorance. Kappa 14:38, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
      • Ignorance of what? I'm curious what sort of value information about this game has, other than to a prospective downloader (who is going to be at ticalc.org anyway). - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 15:04, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
        • The value is, users will understand this caculator better if they know what kind of function it can perform, including games. Kappa 15:21, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
          • Why not add a section to TI-92 or graphing calculator describing the sort of games that are developed for them, then? This specific example serves little purpose, whereas that would give readers the kind of information you describe. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 15:25, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
            • I don't know what kind of games are exist for TI-92s, that's why this article should be merged or kept. Specific examples are the best kind. Kappa 19:16, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
            • P.S. I've abandoned the "or keep" part of my vote. Kappa 19:24, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. No context, no source, nearly no content. Most free games for graphing calculators involve less work and are less notable than high school class projects, and individual interchangable examples of a bloc or set of nearly-identical objects are not encyclopedic. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 14:26, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete in agreement with Sjakkalle and AMIB. No indication this is nearly important enough in the fact-based world to merit an article. If Kappa has documentation that it has such importance, the onus for relieving "ignorant" WP users is on the supposedly non-ignorant contributor. Barno 15:11, 26 September 2005 (UTC) (changed vote to merge below, based on claims of notability _within_ its category)
  • "Doesn't merit an article" is not a reason for deletion. Kappa 15:21, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
    • The reasons Sjakkalle and I posted, however, are reasons for deletion, and he cited them. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 15:25, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
      • There are only four reasons for deletion: "Doesn't merit an article", "Is false", "Cannot be verified", and "Is a copyright infringement". I'm flabbergasted that someone could claim that "Doesn't merit an article" is anything other than a reason for deletion. Different people might disagree about what constitutes "merit", but the general principle, that some topics do not merit an article, is acknowledged by almost all Wikipedians. Kelly Martin 16:27, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
        • You forgot "No content." ¬_¬ - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 16:29, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
          • WP:I is core Wikipedia policy, not just a guideline or suggestion. Barno 18:01, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
            • I'm stumped. What does WP:I have to do with anything? - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 03:27, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
              • Sorry, "WP:I" was intended to reference the Wikipedia:Importance policy. I thought it used to redirect there, but I see now it redirects to Wikipedia:Introduction. Thus the confusion, sorry. Some of my reasons are listed there, not actually as importance but as "Note that an article should still be deemed inappropriate, and subsequently deleted, regardless of importance, if:" six things including can't be expanded beyond a stub, or "does not otherwise belong in Wikipedia" (citing WP:NOT). Consensus in WP has been that freeware games of any type are generally not important-called-"notable" enough for an article (unless one gets more media coverage, public discussion, etc. than any calculator game ever has). Barno 04:05, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete will never go beyond a substub, a free game for a graphical calculator is not notable chowells 16:28, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
• Merge into TI-92, as per Kappa. Owen× ☎ 18:12, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete freeware game for an obsolete calculator (made so by the TI-89). However, I would note that this game is probably one of the more notable calculator games, for whatever that's worth. ESkog 23:50, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
  • I see there's no "Calculator games" article, and no "Games" section in the Calculator article except one on "hELLO = 07734" and its ilk. Can you guys start a good Wikified section of "Calculator#Games" with the most notable calculator games? They're not noteworthy enough for articles individually, probably any of them, but articles like Falldown could reasonably be merged into one moderate section. If it grew enough to be broken out, I'd rather see one good calc-games article than a dozen stubs. Barno 04:25, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Falldown can be found for most TI graphing calculators anyways, but it still doesn't deserve its own article. -Nameneko 01:12, 27 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.