Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Computer and video game settings

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 no consensus. - Mailer Diablo 16:03, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Computer and video game settings

Unverified and original research. I've nominated this article for deletion before. However there was no consensus, so the AfD defaulted to keep, with many users suggesting that the article should be cleaned up with citations added. Even so, it's already been around for two months and still no one has bothered to clean it up or add sources. I'm also starting to doubt the article can be cleaned up, since many of the listed "clichés" are either:

  1. Seen in other forms of media, and not specifically related to video games. For example, Area 51-related facilities appear commonly in all science fiction related media, not just video games.
  2. Due to technological restrictions, such as cities having fewer builings than what one would see in a real city.
  3. Appear commonly in real life, so they can't really be considered as a "cliché". This includes settings such as jungles, deserts, grasslands, and forests.

Also note that similar articles to this one have been deleted before, such as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Computer and video game character stereotypes and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fighting game character stereotypes --TBCTaLk?!? 05:06, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete Just so much navel-gazing - Richfife 05:27, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and Cleanup preferably with a volunteer to improve it. Although I could accept moving the content into a wikibook if somebody is working on something suitable. FrozenPurpleCube 05:43, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment. As I've mentioned aboved, it can't really be cleaned up since most of the cliches are either seen in other forms of media, due to technological restrictions, or appear commonly in real life. Either way, wouldn't it be better for it to be transwiki'd to a gaming wiki instead of wikibooks?--TBCTaLk?!? 05:45, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
That something is a cliche in another media/genre (and may well be mentioned in an article about that media/genre, or cliches in it) actually helps convince me that it should be included. See for example Science fiction themes. As to technological restrictions, in fact I was actually thinking that that explanation should be included in the article (when I saw the 255 and 65535 I thought to myself, that I really should explain the memory issues behind htat). As for existing in the Real World, that too doesn't bother me, as the character of an inclusion can be relevant. Once again, see SFT. Clones exist in the real world, yes, and even Robots. But the issues brought up in Science Fiction about them are still important. Video Games being a different and less communicative media may not have the same depth of meaning (and due to their relative newness have a lot less depth of research and respectiiblity), but that doesn't mean they don't have any, or that expanding it is not a good idea. That said, if you care to name a suggested wiki to move it to, I'll be glad to support it. I'd look, but you seem more involved in the situation, so you might remember something from past discussions. FrozenPurpleCube 06:01, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
First of all, if most of the cliches in the list apply to all media forms, what's the point of having a seperate article on one for video games? Also, it isn't considered a cliche if it's unintentional, such as due to technological restrictions. After all, note that a cliche is defined as "a phrase, expression, or idea that has been overused to the point of losing its intended force or novelty". This also applies to things that exist commmonly in real life, which are seen in video games due to common sense, not for an intended force or novelty. As for a good wiki to transwiki it to, I reccommend Encyclopedia Gamia.--TBCTaLk?!? 07:23, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Because computers and video games are a seperate and distinct media, that often have their own genres which are not directly comparable to the genres in say books and film, that's why. It's a question of presentation, they are different enough that they can't be linked. Your objections as to whether or not any particular thing constitute a cliche more properly belong in a discussion about the article, not in a VfD, but I note that if you examine the various entries under cliches (like the Doctor Who cliches, cliches in animation, and probably others), you'll find many of the same things. So you may have a lot of work to do. FrozenPurpleCube 14:53, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
And since you brought up EG, if you want to make the transfers, and get a consensus agreement on that, it would seem to qualify, but you'll have to check with its members to see if they'll accept the concept. FrozenPurpleCube 14:57, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
AfD is defined as a place for "Wikipedians discuss whether an article should be deleted". I feel that the article should be deleted since all of the listed cliches are technically not cliches, thus AfD is a perfect place for it to be discussed. Also, you don't need the consent of Encyclopedia Gamia to tranwiki an article there, since they are a wiki as well.--TBCTaLk?!? 19:49, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Also, the reason that articles like Doctor Who cliches and cliches in animation exist, is that there are cliches that are specific to that series/genre, whereas this article is simply listing cliches that have existed in all forms of media, such as Area 51, jungle, grassland, etc. settings.--TBCTaLk?!? 19:55, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm afraid I can't concur with you that all of the items are not cliches, as I've read more than a few articles which mention those things. Sorry, not sufficient. And note, cliches in animation is as specific a genre as video and computer games, in fact, there are some overlaps with the two. FrozenPurpleCube 23:21, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Though I do respect your opinions, if there really are "a few articles which mention those things", then why haven't you referenced them in the article? Also, if the cliches of animation and other forms of media "overlap" with video games, then what's the point of having a seperate article for video game cliches?--TBCTaLk?!? 05:19, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Comment What I find funny is that you could have asked for it to be moved without an AfD, why did you chose to go about it this way and not ask the people who have contributed to the article to move it, and maybe even started a discussion on the WikiProject CVG page? Last I checked AfDs should not be used for cleanup. Havok (T/C/c) 07:53, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
Comment Though I admit that transwiki'ing is certaintly a possibily, I'm personally advocating for the page to be deleted. Also, as I've stated before, I feel that the article can't be cleaned up since so much of the article is original research, that if the original research were to be removed, the article wouldn't have enough content to merit either a seperate article or stub. As for mentioning it on the WikiProject CVG page, the WikiProject has already been notified of this discussion through Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and video games/Deletion.--TBCTaLk?!? 05:19, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Maybe I didn't make myself clear, why did you not start a discussion before you put it up for deletion? Going around deleting things is bad practice, specially for the people who have worked on said article. Starting a dialog and trying to come to an agreement first might be the best way to handle such matters. Example, like I stated, you could have asked for it to be moved to another Wiki and forgo the AfD all together. You had several choices in the matter, and you chose to AfD it and at the same time step on the toes of the editors behind the article. Havok (T/C/c) 07:25, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Isn't AfD itself a discussion? As quoted from Wikietiquette, please remember that this "debate is not a vote; [but a place for] recommendations on the course of action to be taken, sustained by arguments." Also, as I've stated above, note that I'm not advocating for the article to be traswiki'd; I'm advocating for it to be deleted.--TBCTaLk?!? 07:30, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
  1. Seen in other forms of media, and not specifically related to video games. For example, Area 51-related facilities appear commonly in all science fiction related media, not just video games.
  2. Due to technological restrictions, such as cities having fewer builings than what one would see in a real city.
  3. Appear commonly in real life, so they can't really be considered as a "cliché". This includes settings such as jungles, deserts, grasslands, and forests.--TBCTaLk?!? 19:49, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. Mitaphane talk 03:05, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep: Seems valid to me. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 05:42, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep AfD is not a way to clean something up. If you want something moved to another Wiki, or cleaned up. You ask for that, you don't AfD it. You can use the {{Move to gaming wiki}} tag, or {{cleanup}}, as an AfD is worthless in this case. Havok (T/C/c) 05:50, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom; WP:NOT for indiscriminate collections of crufty WP:OR. Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:41, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. While the stereotypes/cliches listed do exist in the real world and other forms of media (why this makes them not cliches I do not know), there are definitely unique things that can be said of them and their significance to video games in particular. The way something like a Lava World or Ice World setting is used in a video game (and the rapid juxtaposition of these things as video game levels) clearly differs from the cliched use of a Lava World or Ice World as literary settings, and they are probably far less recognised as cliches there as well. The article rambles and probably needs cleaning up (as you said) but I'm not convinced this isn't a good starting point. And again, the fact that there are tropical islands in the real world, and as the settings for many things, does not mean you can't say anything about it with regards to its use in video games as the typical brightly coloured first level, etc. Do you think this article would be valid if it looked at typical literary settings and the devices each tended to use? Despite the possibly large number shared settings that that article would have with one like this, the discussion in an article like that would differ greatly from one like this simply because they ARE different media and the settings clearly have vastly different uses for them. Being stuck on a glacier in a video game means you probably carry a lot of momentum when you move which makes comlex platform jumping much more difficult. It means something very different in a movie or a novel. --Rankler 15:31, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment An article on or list of cliches in film and fiction is hardly comparable. People have written books and articles, made TV programmes, and given courses on those topics. They are not original research. The only sources for this article, on the other hand, were the observations of the editors. If and when someone writes about this in a reliable, then there should be an article on WP, but not before. Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought and this article contains nothing else. Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:05, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - Categorizing worlds found in video games and determining them to be cliches makes this entire article and its premise original research. Wickethewok 18:27, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. YechielMan 22:13, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep as per Rankler. —SHININGEYES 22:58, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Seconded Keep SAMAS 04:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Not sure why this was AfD'd. In response to the OP, (1) is not necessarily an argument for deleting this article, it could be seen as an argument that we need also an article for typical sci-fi settings. (2) Inadequacies of architecture in emulating settings is a fair mention in an article for computer and videogames. Still not a reason for deletion. (3) So they're not cliches. Alright. But that is an argument to remove this article from the cliche category, not to delete it. -- Solberg 08:02, 23 September 2006 (UTC)Solberg
    • Comment In response to your comments: (1) Please explain how it can be seen as an argument for creating a sci-fi cliche list. Also, ironically, there use to be a sci-fi cliche list, but it was previously deleted on AfD. (2) But why do we have to have a seperate list for them? Can't we keep information on technical restrictions in the articles on games in which they occur? (3) This article is a list of cliches. If none of them are cliches, then what's the point of keeping this article?--TBCTaLk?!? 09:05, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Answer to #3 is simple - rename the page, perhaps to 'Typical computer and video game settings' or something. One can easily fold in reason #2 within it, explain that these come about due to technical restrictions. Also, I think a major point of this is not just that they exist, but are often "within the game world" bizzaringly in proxminity. As for #1, well, if you can't see why then you're probably not going to be convinced. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 12:52, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
If this article were to be changed from a list of cliches to a list of "Typical computer and video game settings", this list would become unmaintainable, like the the List of firearms in video games article. After all, since there are thousands of video game settings out there and it isn't clearly defined how typical typical settings have to be, then basically any video game setting could be added to the article.--TBCTaLk?!? 18:46, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per Angus McLellan. Markovich292 23:12, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per Solberg. —Coat of Arms (talk) 23:28, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. As an actual gamer, I can recognise many of these level types, and I certainly would consider them to be clichés. The article lists common types of obstacle or enemy found in several of the levels, which are clichés. The article also describes many things that have nothing to do with technical restrictions and are largely exclusive to video games - for example, shops where the proprietor charges someone for items necessary to save the world, lava that collects in pools and doesn't harm those who approach it, and fire-based weaponry that continues to work underwater. The lack of citations is certainly a problem, but I'm sure it could be overcome with careful research. Actually, I don't see why the games themselves can't be cited as evidence. RobbieG 15:35, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, cleanup, and rename to Computer and video game environments. The current title made me think it was a list of program settings/options. —Wrathchild (talk) 12:38, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep per RobbieG and Wrathchild. The Kinslayer 13:38, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per Angus McLellan, TewfikTalk 18:55, 27 September 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.