Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gold edition

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 Delete and redirect to Special edition Pastordavid (talk) 19:22, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gold edition

Gold edition (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Although there are many "gold edition" packages out there, this is an non-notable concept that cannot be verified. In addition, this article also qualifies as advertising and is made entirely out of original research. Marlith T/C 05:18, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Comment, I removed the most ad like paragraph of the article. Marlith T/C 05:22, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete - Per comments at WT:VG. — Dihydrogen Monoxide 05:24, 12 December 2007 (UTC) Merge and redirect - Agree with Guyinblack25 below, thanks for bringing that up. — Dihydrogen Monoxide 06:31, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge and Redirect - I'd say integrate whatever is salvageable to Special edition#Video Games or just Special edition. The "Special edition" article is in terrible shape as it is, but is a more general topic that encompasses what "Gold edition" is about. (Guyinblack25 talk 05:54, 12 December 2007 (UTC))
    • In light of other comments, a merge of the current content seems impractical. Though I still believe redirecting it to Special edition is the best option. (Guyinblack25 talk 23:37, 13 December 2007 (UTC))
  • Redirect to Special edition as this term is not exclusive to videogames. Colonel Warden (talk) 09:26, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete I don't see how the information contained herein is worth merging. Looks unverifiable to me, whether in the relm of video games or the general sense. -Verdatum (talk) 18:46, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete this is patently untrue. Only some gold editions have expansion packs. Some of them are just glossy packages with printed manuals instead of PDFs 132.205.99.122 (talk) 20:08, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Neverwinter Nights has a gold edition as a referance please see link NWN Gold--Pluto2spacebeam (talk) 03:03, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Huh? This may be an example, but it is not a reference for the meaning of "gold edition". Regardless, this sort of discussion does not belong in an AFD. If you can improve the article such that it more clearly belongs on WP, you should do so directly so deletion can be avoided. -Verdatum (talk) 05:50, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete as it is a marketing term that may mean different things depending on how the publisher desires to use it. It has no official meaning. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 19:43, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, Re-word, or Merge*
I am the creator of the article, and as such I have a few valid reasons for the retaining of the article.
1. If using an example of another product is a form of advertising, then many more articles should be considered as well, otherwise an example of some kind is needed to make the point.
2. Further elaboratation on what exactly a Gold edition is, and more examples of such 'golded' games.
3. The mention of a certain product, term, word, or what have you that sparks any interest for further investigation can thereby warrant the term advertising.
That may too would seem to feed your belief that this is some type of advertising. Nevertheless unless you have some mention of this topic elsewhere, it needs to exist, at least for the time being. --Ben414 (talk) 12:55, 24 December 2007 (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.