Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RealPlane

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 of the debate was No consensus. Keep. --Durin 21:57, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] RealPlane

NN, D. ComCat 00:15, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Keep; verifiable. ♥♥purplefeltangel♥♥ 01:30, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Individual game mods are nn. StarryEyes 01:38, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete nearly all game mods, just like we delete fan fiction. —Cryptic (talk) 02:24, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete Newyorktimescrossword 05:39, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete per Cryptic. - Mgm|(talk) 10:52, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
    • I'd love to see all those adverts for mods deleted, but apparently people think they're worth keeping. At the very least the dead, inactive and otherwise non-released mods should be purged from the List of Battlefield 1942 mods. - Mgm|(talk) 05:57, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete NN. - Just zis Guy, you know? 14:26, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete as above. Janet13 20:22, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Tr9cc left a personal message on my talk page. In light of the more encyclopedic entry now and the argument that other mods have their own page, I will no longer vote on this issue. I feel that mods shouldn't get their own page, but if general Wikipedia consensus is to keep them, then I'll stay out of this discussion. I DO NOT agree with removal of the tag. Janet13 03:32, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete per nomination. --TantalumTelluride 20:38, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Nominator made no effort whatsoever to support this nomination. Bryan 00:47, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Having reviewed my vote, as promised elsewhere, I stand by "keep". Nobody has yet indicated why they think this particular Battlefield 1942 mod is less notable than the approxmimately 35 other such mods that already have articles in Wikipedia. Yes, that's right, 35 mods with an entire Category:Battlefield 1942 mods to hold them in and a List of Battlefield 1942 mods article to merge this article into if it turns out to be less significant than the ones with stand-alone articles. Bryan 05:26, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep in light of Bryan's comment. A Google search shows that this is a verifiable game mod. Since other mods have articles, this one should, too. Furthermore, I think other notable mods for all games should be allowed articles on Wikipedia as long as we can verify that they exist and are somewhat popular. --TantalumTelluride 13:23, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep or at the very least merge to List of Battlefield 1942 mods. —Phil | Talk 13:30, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. In general only significant and particularly important mods should get articles. Gamaliel 18:08, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge or delete. -Sean Curtin 21:03, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete ComCat is on the right track here...  Grue  14:02, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete and redirect to the list mentioned above. Radiant_>|< 17:09, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep or Merge, though it does not fit the criteria for being AFD to begin with. Tr9ccc 18:40, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

The Deletion TAG was removed because according to the Wikipedia:Deletion policy there was never a basis for placement in the first place. Among the 'Problems that may require deletion', the page fits none of the criteria or nested criteria. This includes:

  • Under Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, the page does not fit violate any rules.
  • Its not "Original research (including the coining of neologisms)" Vanity page
  • Its not "Advertising or other spam"
  • Its not "Hoax (not an article about a hoax)"
  • Its not "Completely idiosyncratic non-topic".
  • Its also not any of the other types such as a copyright violation or dictionary definition and the content abides by Wikipedia:Verifiability.

The article is a small but notable item that should never have been tagged in start with. There are indeed 'mods' that would not meet criteria, but this is not among them. Tr9ccc 17:53, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Well, a number of editor indeed think it does fit the deletion criteria. You shouldn't remove the tag until AfD is closed.  Grue  18:03, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
The problem was not if it fit the criteria for a debate about deletion/meger- it did not fit the criteria for placing the TAG. Tr9ccc 18:10, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
Removing the tag only increases the article's chances for deletion because the tag directs people who are interested in the subject to the article's AfD entry, where they are likely to vote keep. An AfD tag should never be removed before concensus is reached unless it is obviously vandalism. --TantalumTelluride 20:28, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
The earlier attempt was not to remove the tag, which does nothing as you point out, but terminate it alltogther (not a valid method). IMO there should be been a vote to decide what kind of AFD/merger vote should take place for the page, though I suppose this system on average manages to help more then hurt. Tr9ccc 02:45, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Weak keep or Merge, valid and notable, however maybe not deserving of is own article. However I am against tag removal.  Ian13  11:08, 31 October 2005 (UTC)


For those looking for criteria to decide if a 'mod' is notable, there are some concrete things to look for that may be helpful when forming a opinion: What files have actually been released (e.g. not just a website or news posts), and the nature of actual game content created for it (was it a few lines of code, or a complex 3-D model with textures). It can often be hard to gauge the popularity of older notable mods, but examining content and files really separate out the failed projects, game tweaks, or pretenders from more serious work. More time consuming, but very effective in judging a mod's merits, is to go play it and actually see what amount of content in terms of music, textures, and coding was actually put together.
Determining a mods level of achievement can be hard, even for those familiar with modding somtimes. However, checking for content, and not just news posts can provide a useful benchmark for separating out a wildly varying art form. Tr9ccc 04:06, 1 November 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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.