Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Landmaster (Star Fox)

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. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 21:52, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Landmaster (Star Fox)

Landmaster (Star Fox) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This is a gameplay element that does not have real world information to establish notability. The specifics are covered within the various articles, and there is no current assertion for improvement. For two relevant Afds on two other gameplay elements of the series, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arwing and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Great Fox. TTN (talk) 15:08, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. TTN (talk) 15:24, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete and redirect per nom. This stuff is clearly discouraged by WP policies at WP:NOT and there is abundant precedent per, inter alia, the AfD's adduced in the nomination. Eusebeus (talk) 17:04, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete and redirect. If the creator(s) of the Star Fox and F-Zero characters will hardly give the media more information on their development so the main characters will not have their individual articles questioned on notability, how can the vehicles possibly stand on their own? « ₣M₣ » 20:48, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 21:51, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep or Merge the details are not currently covered in other articles, which is why I switched this back from a redirect. When it was switched to a redirect last time none of the information was moved to the redirect destination, and it was before the vehicle appeared in its most recent game.
    As for merging, to which article? This fictional vehicle has appeared or been mentioned in four games from two seperate series. —MJBurrage(T•C) 00:41, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - If there is no assertion of notability, there is no need to present this articles details anywhere, and with no new assertion of notability, this should not have been brought back. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 01:15, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
That is not nearly enough for a whole article. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 16:51, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge: Strategy-based material aside, the rest of the article is notable and all it needs is just the basic information and game-based appearances without the too detailed strategy based stuff unless if it is sourced without the information from that source being too detailed that is all that is really needed to preserve this article and to all the people who chose delete you should consider your options, I won't be too rude about it. -71.59.237.110 (talk) 03:22, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Redirect why do you need to delete it? Just redirect the thing like you had before also if you check MJBurrage who undid your redirect is willing to have it merge/redirected anyway. --Sin Harvest (talk) 05:22, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
    • When/if it is redirected, somebody needs to do a proper merge first. Simply changing the page to a redirect effectively deletes all of the contents (bad and good). Just copying the contents to the page chosen as the target would not preserve the edit history. And again, I ask which page would be the proper one to redirect to, since this is now used in two different series of games. —MJBurrage(T•C) 17:01, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Two series? Both the Starfox games mentioned in this article are on the Starfox series article, do you mean the Smash Bros. trophy? Someoneanother 18:50, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
My bad, the final smashes.. It's trivial information which could be mentioned somewhere in the Smash Bros. article and/or the Starfox series article, but 'it appears in..X' is not enough information for an article. Someoneanother 18:59, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete No secondary sources to establish notability or provide real world context. Jay32183 (talk) 06:04, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Most of the article is already Real World. Briefly describing what the thing looks like, or where it appears is not a "Game Guide". The existing material is not about how to play the game, it is about the existence of an item that is an element of many games. —MJBurrage(T•C) 17:01, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
      • I have read the article. There is no meaningful real world content. There is no discussion of the development or the reception. Game appearances is not real world information. Jay32183 (talk) 22:07, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
        • How is a brief description of the Landmaster, and its multiple appearances, not real world information? (The tank does really appear in multiple games, and its design does really change)
          WP:GAMEGUIDE describes a game guide as an instruction manual to playing a game. I do not see any information in the article that looks like play instructions. I could see an argument for removing things like the dimensions, but I thought that should wait for this discussion. —MJBurrage(T•C) 01:30, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
          • When I, and others, say real world information we are talking about WP:FICT not WP:GAMEGUIDE. It's not that information needs to be removed, it's that information needs to be added and there aren't sources for it. The development of the vehicle by the game writes and produces as well as reception by proper critics, no fan sites, needs to be there. It looks like sources aren't there for that. If you want to prove me wrong, dig up sources. Jay32183 (talk) 03:29, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Star Fox (series) Minor vehicle in comparison to the Arwing (already redirected), no sign that the information needed to sustain a seperate article exists, the type of info needed is outlined by Jay. It's a tank.. in the Starfox series... It's a tank in the Starfox series. That hardly needs a seperate article when a series article exists. If anything is needed for merge it can be done whenever. Someoneanother 18:50, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Non-notable in the real-world. Doctorfluffy (talk) 16:37, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep this well-referenced and well-organized article that asserts notability and is of interest to editors and readers in the real world. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 03:34, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Actually, the article is poorly referenced. The organization of information has no impact on an AFD, since that's a problem that can be solved purely by effort. You also seem to not understand the term "real world context". It means the article is written from the perspective of the real world, not that people in the real world will read it. Jay32183 (talk) 05:09, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
        • Yep, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles, the phrase 'well referenced' doesn't refer to use of {{cite web}} templates, but instead refers to significant coverage in multiple secondary sources. Addhoc (talk) 14:05, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Redirect - trivial coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. Addhoc (talk) 14:05, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. It is relevant to people who are interested in these game scenarios. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:45, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
    • That is not the basis for inclusion on Wikipedia. That claim could be made for any information, true or not. Jay32183 (talk) 07:44, 8 February 2008 (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.