Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DragonFable (2 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 delete. Joyous! | Talk 21:14, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DragonFable

While already voted to be deleted once before because it was a beta phase, I just want to hedge my bets and note that it should again be deleted as it is just starting its release in a few hours [1] so notability is still a question. Removing from the article the parts that read like a how-to manual doesn't seen to leave much encyclopedic information. Ricky81682 (talk) 09:55, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - completely non-notable game at the moment. In a years time the issue will decide itself - Peripitus (Talk) 12:32, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete NN now, and this article belongs on a game guide site —Mets501^talk 16:34, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, currently nonnotable. If it becomes notable in the future, someone will write an article on it that doesn't read like a how-to manual. --

Docether 18:42, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per above --Starionwolf 23:21, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Just because it is not notable doesn't mean it should be deleted. What's wrong with having an article of a game that is not notable. I am a game maker and my games are not notable, but yet they are not up for deletion, I just had alot of rewriting and merging to do. Other people helped me rewrite. This article may currently be like a game manual, but it can be written to read like a professional encyclopedia article. One of my game's articles was unprofessional, but with the help of the community it is now. The same can be done with the DragonFable article. If needed the DragonFable community (players signed up on the Artix Entertainment Forums) probably wouldn't mind rewritting it. I would even help. How it is written is the problem not popularity/notability. This can be fixed.--VampireSlayer2 22:11, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep When I rewrote the article, I intended it to be a source of information. I am trying to get support for a rewrite that will make it look more professional and fix the article. The community is growing quickly, and deleting it would be denying them information, most of which is very useful --Computafreak 06:40, 16 June 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.