Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mario Strikers series

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 delete both. --Coredesat 05:20, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mario Strikers series and Wrecking Crew (video game) series

(Breaking out the old-school deletion reasons) this is an idiosyncratic non-topic. This isn't a series; it's two games, one of which isn't even released yet. There's no content here; just some release dates, a brief lead, and a GameFAQs-esque list of characters appearing in these games.

Additionally, if this article is deleted, the associated {{Mario Soccer series}} should also be deleted. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 11:14, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I've added Wrecking Crew (video game) series for the same reasoning; it's just one obscure game and its equally-obscure remake. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 11:20, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

• Keep Mario Strikers' and Delete Wrecking Crew. TJ Spyke 20:53, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Wrecking Crew, since the second game was indeed released in Japan. Strikers is much less of a clear choice, as the second game isn't released and won't be until next year. I'd say Merge the sourced info into the main Strikers article for now until the game is released (or at least closer to release). Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 21:21, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletions. -- Chacy 23:06, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
• Comment - I want to make it absolutely clear: each game in these non-series already has its own article. These articles are in addition to the game articles, and have no useful content whatsoever. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 07:00, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. -- moe.RON ^{talk | done | doing} 00:57, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Man in Blacks latest comment. The Kinslayer 10:06, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

• Keep - To my mind it seems to be a notable article. -- Sensenmann 16:56, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

  I realize you're a bit new to Wikipedia, but not ever AFD is about notability. I'm not arguing that these "series" aren't notable; I'm arguing that they don't exist. They're two games long, and one of them has only one game released and the other is a single game and its enhanced remake. They're not series in the traditional sense, and their articles have no useful content at all. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 17:06, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Combination 17:52, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete both, or redirect if necessary. Andre (talk) 01:39, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - Glorified needless disambigs. Similar to Dragon Quest Heroes which I feel was erroneously kept. - Hahnchen 03:46, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as they are redundant with the already existing game articles. - Lex 07:30, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete glorified disambiguation pages. Two games don't make a series and there's not much to discuss about them in context of "series"; you can discuss the similarities and differences in the game articles themselves. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 08:32, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

• If you're going to delete the Mario Strikers series, then you might as well delete the Mario Tennis and Golf series. A series consists of more than one game, so the article is acceptable. -MattCHarris —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MattCHarris (talk • contribs) .
  • A series involving two products is called a Duology. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.165.214.173 (talk • contribs) .
    • There are four Mario Golf and Mario Tennis games each. Granted, I don't think those series articles are very good, but it's not totally unreasonable to describe them as series. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 08:33, 29 October 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.