Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RuneScape holiday items (second 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 was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:24, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RuneScape holiday items

I believe that this Wiki is probably one of the most fancrufty in the RuneScape series. I nominate a Delete per WP:NOT, as this is not an in-game guide for RuneScape. Who wants to learn about what items were dropped in a game so many eons ago when the information can be found on the main site? This kind of information doesn't belong here.Makoto 00:21, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

• Yeh, delete. Irredeemably crufty in my opinion. That tip.it article might fit onto the community page though. Hyenaste ^(tell) 00:48, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, per nom and Hyenaste. Quick overview of this in RuneScape economy should suffice, and i'm sick of the vandalism, nonsense, OR and speculation in this worthless article. CaptainVindaloo ^{t c e} 00:56, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete this is likely to only interest the people who play it. It's more of a list and is rather uncyclopedic.--Andeh 01:00, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete It's obvious that quite a bit of effort went into this, including animated GIFs! But this level of detail about a game is simply not encyclopedic. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 01:48, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

  Comment But I thought the proper definition of an encyclopedia is a comprehensive written compendium that contains information on all branches of knowledge or a particular branch of knowledge according to this artice. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 15:37, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:NOT, if any of the contents are very very special and important then they can be placed in the main article. --WinHunter ^(talk) 02:45, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as unencyclopedic gamecruft and speculation. --Coredesat talk. ^_^ 03:16, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, WP:NOT the RuneScape FAQ. --Kinu ^t/_c 04:59, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Andeh. —Khoikhoi 08:15, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep Only joking! Delete per nom and per the massive fancruft warning on the article's talk page. This would be a fine article for a fan wiki but not an encyclopedia. --kingboyk 13:30, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

• I simply added those notices to every article in Category:RuneScape, I didn't stop to judge the quality. They do seem to be working, however. CaptainVindaloo ^{t c e} 23:25, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

• Yes, I didn't mean any implication to the contrary. Let me rephrase "and also because it breaches the fancruft warning" :) It's a nice article though so I hope it's get sent to another wiki. --kingboyk 14:15, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

• No worries. CaptainVindaloo ^{t c e} 17:14, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete This would be fine on a personal/gaming wiki, but it's just not right for Wikipedia. --Wafulz 14:28, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Comment, hopefully we won't get an invasion from the RS Army :P.--Andeh 15:04, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Hey, the nominator is in that army, and so are CaptainVindaloo and I, the first two supporters. Hyenaste ^(tell) 20:35, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

• I'd call us more of a Company than an Army. :-) CaptainVindaloo ^{t c e} 23:25, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Still a pretty generous title. Cult, maybe? Hyenaste ^(tell) 17:37, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. fuzzy510 16:46, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete after making sure the most important points are covered in the article on RuneScape economy. The rest can be transwikified to the appropriate WikiBook. Anton Mravcek 18:59, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: What "important points"? Placing information about these items would be deemed fancruft, and they'd be removed. Makoto 19:10, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete I agree, the article is not right for wikipedia mathewguiver 19:57, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, rinse, and repeat Not on Wikipedia.--Planetary 22:32, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per all other "delete" votes--Ed^{talk c E} 01:24, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
• Comment:I've put it at Wikia:RuneScape:Discontinued items and holiday drops/Wikipedia, so the transwiki is complete for those that suggested it. Hyenaste ^(tell) 17:37, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
• Weak delete. We don't really need it here. It would do much better on the RuneScape Wiki, and some of it, such as the external links, could be added to RS economy and community. Dtm142 20:08, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as fancruft and per WP:NOT in my backyard. I would have added 'merge' to that but I'm no longer convinced that throwing articles at the RS wiki is helping anyone. The information here can be obtained on fan sites no trouble, and its presence acts as a fancruft magnet. QuagmireDog 01:23, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Comment Already merged by Hyenaste, and looking good, disregard above comment RE merging. QuagmireDog 01:52, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Take it to Wikibooks or some similar Wikia site, but not here. RFerreira 06:56, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment You say that as if it hasn't already been done. Are you even reading the comments before yours? For shame, for shame. Hyenaste ^(tell) 20:21, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
• Comment I'm wondering how many people here who are going Wikipedia is not a game guide actually read the article.....there's acutally a decent amount of background information on the topic, for being a bizarre topic. I'd suggest merging what's notable and then deleting it. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 02:50, 30 August 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.