Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Land Mine (relist nomination)

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 of the debate was Keep. --Luigi30 (Ταλκ το mε) 22:15, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Land Mine

One of the unsourced, and at this time externally unverifiable drinking game articles listed in a mass deletion earlier today (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Circle of Death (drinking game)) Per the closing statement of this aborted mass-nomination, this is an individual relist of the article. -- Saberwyn 10:40, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

• If deleted, recreate as redirect to landmine. -- Saberwyn 10:40, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Adding a request for verifiable sources to this article page would be a good way to start this process. The category listing didn't work because this sort of leg-work needs to be done on each drinking game article in turn. If some are verifiable and considered encyclopedic material by other editors, then the category delete is null and void. Vizjim 11:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, listed in the Best Drinking Games Book Ever, and with 250+ Amazon.com drinking game books listed... --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEMES?) 13:36, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete again WP:NOT Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:20, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

• Comment. I presume that in referring to WP:NOT you are specifically talking about "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information", point 8? This says, I quote - Instruction manuals - while Wikipedia has descriptions of people, places, and things, Wikipedia articles should not include instruction - advice (legal, medical, or otherwise), suggestions, or contain "how-to"s. This includes tutorials, walk-throughs, instruction manuals, video game guides, and recipes. An article on Land Mine has the obvious potential to contain a) history and evolution of the game, b) its cultural significance, c) appearances in books, on TV shows, in films etc, and thus is more than simply a collection of rules (it doesn't matter if these things are not there or haven't been completed: the fact is, they could be inserted). However, the rules need to be included as otherwise it would be impossible to give a clear idea of the game - and I presume you are not arguing that the entries for Chess and Soccer should be deleted? Vizjim 11:05, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. "Appeared in Hamilton College in 2004" equals WP:NFT. Brian G. Crawford 21:33, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Listed in a published book by a noted publisher equals notable. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEMES?) 00:20, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete; there may be 250+ books listed, but this seems to be an obscure new game that's probably not listed in most of them.--Prosfilaes 04:29, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Actually, it's listed by this name in at least one of them, and that book isn't the newest one on the list. So this comment appears to be incorrect. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEMES?) 12:41, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Keep A legit game.

• Move to Land Mine (drinking game). Land Mine should redirect to the munition. -- GWO
• keep, move and redirect per GWO. Dspserpico 18:26, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
• weak delete Due to the point about this being an instruction manual. It seems to belong either in Wiktionary or perhaps as a two-sentence entry in "Drinking Games".Apollo 10:45, 9 May 2006 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.