Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Superpower Classic

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 this content and redirect to Geo-Political web-based simulator where it's already mentioned. Sandstein 21:33, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Standard closing disclaimer: If this discussion contained any opinions offered by single purpose accounts or arguments not based on applicable policy, they were discounted in assessing consensus for this decision. Sandstein 21:33, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Superpower Classic

Superpower Classic (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

It fails under the notability guidelines (see WP:WEB) just like the other, related, article I nominated a few days ago: Star Wars Diplomacy]. Furthermore, it has already been deleted for nomination once and the result was then to delete: see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/True World Simulator for more information on that AfD. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 16:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

• KEEP, the articles about individual nationsims were created to reduce clutterness on the main Geo-Political web-based simulator and flesh out the histories of said nationsims. Itake 19:30, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Doesn't matter WHY it was created. It fails WP:web, was PREVIOUSLY DELETED, and shows no signs of improvement. No discussion needed...nuke it and salt the earth (prevent recreation) --Brian ^{(How am I doing?)} 20:00, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

• KEEP, I agree with Itake on this one. Cincgreen 2010, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: it should be noted that Itake tried to remove the AfD notice from the Superpower Classic article, calling it "conflict exporting". Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 20:27, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

If you can't argue for a delete without straying from the subject, don't even try. Itake 20:29, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh and course, it should be noted User:Jobjörn is attempting to influence the AfD by recruiting people to delete[1]. Itake 20:49, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment First, the information provided goes to show if you are acting in good faith or not. Removing an AFD notice is not editing in good faith. Second, Please also restrain yourself from making Personal Attacks on other editors.. This was already deleted once and shows no signs of improvement from the last article. Cincgreen, can you give reasons for why you belive this should be kept? Just saying "I agree with X" doesn't sway the ending administrator's thoughts as this is a discussion not a ballot. --20:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

As I said, "my reasons are the same as Itake's". You seem to be implying that one good reason can be outweighed by several bad ones. As a matter of fact, you are implying that it *is* a ballot, or at least, a race to generate "reasons". I think Itake summed it up nicely. KEEP. Cincgreen, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

comment User:Jobjörn is NOT attempting to influence the AfD by recruiting people to delete. That is actually something that the AFD rules ask users to do. Anyone that has edited the page in question should be informed using that exact text which can be found on the "How to start an AFD" section of the AFD page.

It is generally considered civil to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the article that you are nominating the article. To find the main contributors, look in the page history or talk page of the article and/or use TDS' Article Contribution Counter. For your convenience, you may use {{subst:AFDWarningNew|Article title}} (for creators who are totally new users), {{subst:AFDWarning|Article title}} (for creators), or {{subst:Adw|Article title}} (for contributors or established users).

Your comments are seriously throwing doubt on if you are truely acting in good faith. --Brian ^{(How am I doing?)} 20:59, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

And your comments are worthless. Seems we both fail. Itake 21:02, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

You have received a warning on your talk page for personal attacks. Please refrain from making them or administrators will be involved. Personal attacks can warrent punishment from a warning to temporary or permanently being banned from wikipeida. Please do not take AFD's personal nor make personal comments about other people --Brian ^{(How am I doing?)} 21:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Your failing has not ended. Itake 21:08, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. WP:AGF failures on the part of Itake don't help. -Amarkov ^blah_edits 23:02, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: Itake's original reason for "keep" was the articles about individual nationsims were created to reduce clutterness on the main Geo-Political web-based simulator and flesh out the histories of said nationsims. (See above.) Since, almost the entire SPC article has been copied into the article on Geo-Political web-based simulators, making the nominated article effectively redundant. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 04:06, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

• DELETE. This article is merely a crude attempt at advertising an external non-notable site. Lima Golf 17:13, 9 December 2006 (UTC)*

• KEEP. In response to Lima Golf, Superpower is in fact a very notable site, and I would like to know how you can call one of the most famous websites in the nationsimulator community non-notable. In response to Jobjorn, I would agree that some of the content under Superpower on the main nationsimulator page should be removed, there are many, many articles worse than this one that should be removed, so why target one of the longer, better articles?--Conquistador III 17:29, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

• • Comment: While it may be notable to nationsim players, it is not notable overall and as thus not suited for inclusion an encyclopedia. Geo-Political web-based simulators covers SPC too, although I doubt whether that article would make it through an AfD. But why target "one of the longer, better articles"? Because I happened to find it and looked into it. If I do the same with another article, I will "target" that one too. And I am contributing to other AfDs: such as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brahma Kumaris Info.
    So, Conquistador III, could you explain how SPC is actually notable under WP:WEB? Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 17:34, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

• • Comment: Perhaps worth noting is the fact that the above comment is Conquistador IIIs one and only edit on the english wikipedia so far.[2] Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 17:35, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

• • Comment I have, in fact, made many edits to various articles on the Wikipedia, however, seldom do I log in. I did have an account with quite a few edits on it, but as I rarely log in it seems to have been deleted. Now, if you were to go to the Superpower website under the "Essays" forum, you would find a number of articles and essays on politics of the real world, and spirited debates about the said articles, which are generally sourced from an article from a major news outlet, such as BBC, and includes the author's interpretations and beliefs on the article from the news agency, and often some facts that are not included in the news article, thus conforming to the first clause of WP:WEB.--Conquistador III 18:57, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

• • Comment: Eh, I do belive you have misunderstood WP:WEB. It is not the website that needs to cite its sources, it is the article on the website that needs to cite sources independent of the website, about the website. Do you understand? Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 19:56, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

• Redirect: as noted above, virtually all the contents of this article are already in Geo-Political web-based simulator (aka "Nationism"); a redirect to that article would result in no loss of content. And the other article is certainly not too lengthy now (in fact, the "How a geo-political simulator is played" section should be near the top, so that this information need not be repeated when describing specific games, such as Superpower:Classic). John Broughton | Talk 21:09, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
• Merge to parent article. FirefoxMan 00:21, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect as John Broughton says. -- Lord Gravitron ^{Message | Contrib} 12:22, 14 December 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.