Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darwinia

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. Joyous 01:02, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Darwinia

Ok, I hope I'm doing this right :)

The current page for 'Darwinia' is a disambiguation page. However, the first set of links points to Darwinia (plant) and scent myrtle, of which neither page exsists in Wikipedia. Therefore, I say the current Darwinia page be deleted, and the Darwinia (computer game) page be moved to the Darwinia page. NeoThermic 00:29, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Erm...- Darwinia (Game) should become Darwinia. Darwinia (Plant) should stay as Darwinia (Plant). Not sure who agrees though...

Disagree strongly. The plant is far more important; it has been named for well over 100 years, and will still be around for hundreds of years after the game is forgotten. I'd be surprised if the game is still around in 5 years. MPF 18:36, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Keep- its a disambiguation page, the plant entry will get written at some point--nixie 00:32, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The Darwinia Plant link was added on the 16th November 2004. For two months the page has not been added. What hope does that bring for the page to be added in the future? NeoThermic 00:56, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Added. It should probably also be noted that the game hasn't actually been released. --nixie 01:10, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

While the game is not released to the public, its in its RC stage of Beta testing. Possibly a compromise, such as the linking to Google's disambiguation page would be better? As an example of the populartiy of Darwinia as a computer game, a google search shows it at #1, so why shouldn't it be the first page to be indicated by the wikipeida article? NeoThermic 02:08, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. I added one that also has a red link. RickK 00:36, Jan 18, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Wikipedia is a work in progress. Don't worry about a few redlinks. Gamaliel 02:11, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep -- DCEdwards1966 05:45, Jan 18, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Lectonar 07:42, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete There can always be a link to the plant at the top of the article, much like Introversion has. I believe this is usually done for articles that are more specialized/less "popular" -- LLamaBoy 09:47, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, Work in progress. Sooner or later somebody comes along somewhere, someday, sometime, and writes an article about it. Inter 10:40, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Comment I advise the nominator to take this to Wikipedia:Requested moves. This is not a deletion per se. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 15:06, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I didn't know that page exsisted. What should be done then about the current VfD? NeoThermic 16:08, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Move to Darwinia (disambiguation), and move Darwinia (plant) to Darwinia -- Eugene van der Pijll 17:04, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Move to Darwinia (disambiguation), and move Darwinia (plant) to Darwinia - MPF 18:44, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Darwinia (plant) now seems to have a good start on an article. Privileging either the plant or the game over the other instead of leaving a conventional disambiguation page at Darwinia would annoy or confuse gamers or biologists. --TenOfAllTrades 19:12, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, let the article grow (pardon the pun). Megan1967 02:16, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as a disambiguation page, seeing as Darwinia (novel) has also been added, it makes the most sense. Moving Darwinia (plant) to Darwinia would be a bad idea, as I think most people will be looking for the game rather than the plant (although the plant should be achnowledged using the disambiguation page, rather than a link to it at the top of an article). --Coolsi 11:58, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as disambig. I read the novel, it wasn't bad. Jayjg | (Talk) 22:51, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. -Sean Curtin 00:33, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as a disambiguation page - the plant isn't obviously more notable than the book or game, since I only knew about the book before seeing this. Bryan 22:21, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.