Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/True World Simulator

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete all three. Sjakkalle (Check!) 10:06, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] True World Simulator, WorldPower, and SuperPower Classic, all created by User:Itake

stubby article on yet another worldsim, with one line of text and an external link to the homepage. "True World Simulator" returns 31 hits on Google. "WorldPower" + nationsim returns 0. "SuperPower Classic" on Google returns 2480 hits: 21 are displayed, and the other 12459 are deemed very similar to the 21 already displayed. I say Delete for True World Simulator and WorldPower, but am Neutral on SuperPower Classic. jglc | t | c 17:38, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

  • According to Geo-Political web-based simulator, "50 members and daily activity" seem to be criteria for the success and notability of such a simulation. jglc | t | c 18:56, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
  • No, thats an example of how it might go with nationsims going active and popping up back active.Itake 19:21, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Hey whats that? This is a free dictionary, its supposed to contain INFORMATION. My articles are just that, information. I see no reason what so ever to delete these entries just because they don't return enough hits on google.

Also, search for WorldPower 3.0 and you will get a hit on the nationsim directly. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User:Itake}17:52, 3 August 2005|Itake}17:52, 3 August 2005]] ([[User talk:Itake}17:52, 3 August 2005|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Itake}17:52, 3 August 2005|contribs]]).

  • First of all, Wikipedia is not a dictionary. That is Wiktionary. Also, Wikipedia Is Not... an indiscriminate collection of information. That is to say, simply because something exists or is true does not grant it automatic inclusion in Wikipedia. Generally, for things such as websites or games, the object in question must be "notable" for its importance in a particular field or area of interest, or for its visibility in popular culture. jglc | t | c 17:58, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Okay, encyclopedia. Whatever. They are all notable. If you did some time to read up on this subject you would see that there exists like 50 or so (and probably more thats just not listed) nationsims, but only TWS, WP, SPC and Qpawn are really big. Thats why only did pages for them. If I wanted to, I could have done it for every single nationsim but I didn't since there are many that have been inactive for years now. So they are significant in this context, they are significant in the world of nationsims. Itake
    • This is why I withheld judgment on Qpawn and SuperPower Classic. Also, a dictionary is very different, and serves a distinct purpose, from an encyclopedia. jglc | t | c 18:03, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
  • I know what a dictionary is and I know what an encyclopedia is. Thank for that brief but unecessary lesson.

Now, the WP and TWS entries are only one-liners because I don't have any more information on them. There is probably alot more information to fill in there. If you look at the wikipedia entry for goverment simulation you will see alot of info on TWS that I plan to put in there. As for WP, no I don't have anymore info. If you want to delete it, even though its notable, I demand a vote of some sort.Itake 18:07, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

This is a vote. Dr Gangrene 18:18, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
  • And where do you click to vote to keep all the entries? Itake 18:22, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
    • Right here, in the body of the discussion: You can choose to Delete, Keep, or declare yourself Neutral and only commenting. You can also state that you feel the articles should be merged with already-existing content, or transwiki'd to another Wikipedia-family wiki. jglc | t | c 18:53, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
  • HA! I got info on WorldPower aswell! Eat that! Now leave me, and my contributions alone and go find something useful to do Itake 18:52, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
    • It doesn't matter. Simply because there is information available on something does not automatically grant it notoriety or notability. jglc | t | c 18:53, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
  • No, as you obviously don't recall I already explained why they are notable. Did you even read the whole article? What matters now is that they are no longer one-liners.Itake 19:17, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Votes

  • That is probably the longest discussion without a single vote on VfD that I have seen. That being said, I'm really not sure that the notability of these nationsims extends beyond the people that play them, and since there aren't too many that are active, I suggest we delete them all as the "biggest one" of these three has 68 listed registered users. Sasquatch′↔T↔C 19:33, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
    • There are thousands of players playing these games, and thats what I call notable. US gov sim for example, has about 500 members. The ASG has 500 members. WorldPower has 80 members. This is large, and saying that its not just because you never heard of it is sad. I hope people start harrasing the articles you do aswell. Itake 19:41, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
      • Please do not think of this as harrassment. We are simply trying to come to a consensus on what ought or ought not be considered encyclopaedic. jglc | t | c 19:43, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Then whats the problem? They were all empty entries before I created them. I'm okay that someone removed my addition of SPC to the entry for superpower but none of the others are conflicting with more "important" entries so I see no reason not to leave them alone. Itake 19:48, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
Please note that, every single time you edit a Wikipedia page, the bottom of the page displays a warning that If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, do not submit it. While it is definitely Wikipedia's policy to Be Bold, you must also recognise that Wikipedia is an open-edit community. jglc | t | c 19:35, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete all three as essentially non-notable forums outside of their own fanbase. The thousands of duplicate hits for "SuperPower Classic" are simply individual forum posts. TWS doesn't have an Alexa ranking, TP is on a forum hosting site, and SPC has a rank of ~200,000, and that's including a second forum/site on the same host. WP:NOT a web directory. --Icelight 20:52, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
  • I vote to Keep. This is a notable genre in internet gaming. Is this not the debate? If so, then let my opinion be heard. This is a notable genre, though it may not have the number of users as EverQuest, or World of Warcraft, or even Master of Orion 2. Measuring the notability in numbers, though, is both very difficult, given the constant fluidity of geopolitical world simulator gamer population, and in many ways incompetent. The genre doesn't have great numbers for a few reasons, not one of which is not that the genre itself, more a subgenre of simulation, is unimportant. These games are long, many times tedious, and most people only want to play one of a very few nations, and when they do get it, they may leave. Also, think about it. When was the last time you saw an ad for any of these games? See, there is no member benchmark for notability, because that would be silly. It's the idea behind the game that we should be talking about. The idea to put players in the shoes of world leaders has been an idea in the backs' of many developers' minds, starting with Civilization, which could qualify as the first nationsim, and now we are just carrying that tradition on. Allowing players to have "power" over a nation/organization is an idea that, frankly, few have picked up on. Call me a partisan and ignore me, if you wish, but my points are still valid. This idea is notable and deserves to be heard, not ignored. This unsigned vote was by DJ_R. This was the user's first contribution to Wikipedia. Nandesuka 12:35, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
    • Let me note that I only VfD'd instances of nationsim games. The article Geo-Political web-based simulator, and redirects such as Nationsim, were not nominated, precisely for the reasons stated above by DJ_R. jglc | t | c 13:14, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, Wikipedia is not a web directory. Lord Bob 04:09, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete per Lord Bob. Nandesuka 12:35, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, neologism. Radiant_>|< 13:51, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. --Scimitar parley 18:11, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Keep I am the current admin of WP and have updated the WP entry to include a more comprhensive history and I hope those who voted for deletion will recondier their votes, surley if superpower and others deserve a entry the largest and most active nationsim deserves one.

  • Strong Delete all --JPotter 02:15, August 8, 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/r/t/Wikipedia%7EArticles_for_deletion_True_World_Simulator_7555.html"