Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tetris & Dr. Mario

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 keep. Please defer merge related discussion to article talk. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 05:05, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tetris & Dr. Mario

Tetris & Dr. Mario (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

A compilation cartridge with minor changes to their gameplay and design. No proper redirect target. Delete. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:04, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• Comment. Is there a notability guideline for video games? Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps)))} 00:34, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Not significant ones, I don't think. However, it is agreed that if the article is redundant to other articles (for instance, the gameplay sections could just be c/ped from Tetris and Dr. Mario), it should be redired or deleted. - A Link to the Past (talk) 16:15, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. There is not a need for an article on a compilation cartridge. The articles at Tetris and Dr. Mario more than sufficiently cover these games. Resolute 04:46, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Evil Spartan 15:18, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. All the information is redundant and there is no logical redirect target - it would be impossible to pick either Tetris or Dr. Mario. It's a pretty unlikely search term, too. ɑʀкʏɑɴ • ^(talk) 20:14, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Keep The difference with this cartridge seems to be that the games were originally released for the NES, but this was a compliation of them for the SNES, like Super Mario All-Stars, with some new content. If we can't keep it, mentions of the compliation should be merged within the Tetris and Dr. Mario articles. Nate 22:46, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
• Merge relevant content to Tetris and Dr. Mario, and presumably redirect although I'm not sure where (flip a coin?) Confusing Manifestation 23:52, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Keep or Merge If we decide to merge it, I'll merge it into the Video game Dr.Mario, but it really is a fine article, there is no reason to delete it.

• Keep There were changes to the actual games, enough to justify a seperate articles. I don't want to play the WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS card, but we have plenty of articles on other compilation games. Lrrr IV 04:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
• Merge and delete. I don't see small changes to a few games as enough to justify a seperate article. Other compilations exist: which leads me to believe, are they all necessary? A good percent of compilations are usually direct ports, or ports with minor changes. Notable information should be put in the Dr. Mario and Tetris articles, then the article should be deleted. I think the same should apply to other compilations. RobJ1981 04:53, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep The games of the compilation are significantly different from the individual respective Gameboy games. I think that makes it unique enough to get its own article.--Kylohk 13:01, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
  • How? The article doesn't even mention any significant difference between these versions and the original versions. - A Link to the Past (talk) 15:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

• And if there is a significant difference, why is it important enough to have its own article, rather than just a section in the article on the original game? (e.g. there's just one Breakout article, despite there being a few different versions) Confusing Manifestation 00:53, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

• Keep. This is Nintendo game, there are differences between these versions and the original versions. Vald 13:22, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 13:19, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Yes, like there are differences between the 20th anniversary version of a movie. But it doesn't get its own article. - A Link to the Past (talk) 16:14, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. Marašmusïne_Talk 16:05, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep as its a separate game. The differences might be minor, but they're enough to warrant a separate article rather than a footnote in some other one. —Xezbeth 08:27, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Minor differences do not warrant being a separate article. If the differences are minor, then guess what? The majority of its content will be redundant to the two articles it's based on. - A Link to the Past (talk) 09:17, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
    • I would have said that if it was a redlink, but the current article would have proved me wrong. I'm not sure what the problem with the current article is; its clearly different from the two separate games, is reasonably detailed, and has happily existed for two years with no problems. —Xezbeth 09:25, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
      • Name me five major changes to Tetris and Dr. Mario in this game. - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:15, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
• Merge with Dr. Mario (video game). Tetris is about the game in general, not the SNES version. This way, it will be in the similar vein as how Super Mario Advance was merged to Super Mario Bros. 2 (and et cetera; I believe YOU were the one to merge them as well, A Link to the Past). Hardcore gamer 48 09:47, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
• Merge - I agree with Hardcore gamer 48, The Dr. Mario article seems like the best place for it. It's already mentioned on List of Tetris variants, so there's really no other place for it on the Tetris article. (Guyinblack25 17:36, 17 July 2007 (UTC))
• keep Wikipedia isn't paper, and the subject would merit inclusion independent of the existence of other articles. This is a port of two NES games to the SNES, so it is not simply a combination of two existing articles, plus it has new game modes, etc. — brighterorange (talk) 19:02, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
  • I repeat (a million times) - where is the notability here? Having a couple new modes doesn't change the fact that you could actually just copy/paste most of the content from the Tetris and Dr. Mario (video game) articles. Most of Tetris & Dr. Mario is redundant to those articles, and there's no disputing. - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:17, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
    • What does copy and pasting have to do with notability? Are you talking about some other quality like uniqueness that (AFAIK) we don't have policies/guidelines about? This is a popular title published by Nintendo. Might we somewhere have a list of SNES games that wants to link to this? Maybe it's a Player's Choice game, having sold over a million units? I understand the desire to avoid duplicated content, but this game is notable on its own and the content is not a strict duplication. At the very minimum, it needs to be a merge and redirect so that the incoming links have somewhere to find information on the release. — brighterorange (talk) 13:30, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
      • It sold a million copies. It has a couple new modes. How unique! - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:15, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
        • Surely a million copies makes it notable? There are only a handful of SNES games that sold as well. — brighterorange (talk) 18:45, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
        • A handful, right. Anyway, you've given ONE assertion of notability, which changes absolutely nothing. You still haven't explained why one different mode warrants a collection of two games to have its own article. - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:53, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
• Merge per Hardcore gamer 48. -- Jelly Soup 20:42, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
• Merge with Dr Mario. Notability itself aside, there simply isn't very much content for this article. The game itself isn't the issue; the article is. And this article could never grow beyond a stub. And its material will never be significant beyond its connection to the two parent games. And, frankly, I find it very hard to believe that most readers would even think to search for this specific game combination. They'd be far more likely to simply search for one of the parent games. Bladestorm 19:24, 19 July 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.