Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zork timeline
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. I'll userfy if anyone thinks there's some information worth merging to Zork W.marsh 15:05, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Zork timeline
This fictional timeline has no reliable primary sources and reliable secondary sources to demonstrate notability.--Gavin Collins 22:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletions. --Gavin Collins 09:25, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
- Time to destroy the world, I mean the article. Delete JuJube 12:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Wow, talk about an unencyclopedic article! Nyttend 13:40, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete All relevant information already covered in Zork. --Blanchardb 16:54, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
- Merge to Zork. A redirect from this page isn't going to cause any pain. There's no reason to have invoked the AfD process. -Harmil 06:03, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete, fails WP:NOT#PLOT. Doubtful any sort of notability can be established per WP:FICT. Doctorfluffy 06:05, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Merge to Zork 132.205.99.122 20:19, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete fails WP:Plot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ridernyc (talk • contribs) 20:31, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
- Comment: That's right, we must delete or merge this trivial article that's only useful to a few thousand people in order to save electrons. Remember, save those electrons, they're more important than you think —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.139.148.100 (talk) 18:36, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
- Clean & Keep or Merge - I think the article is very, very messy. I think if the entire thing is rewritten, expanded, added more real world context. Then it might be a good idea to keep it. Otherwise I think a merge/redirect would be good instead. I don't think it needs to be deleted though. --businessman332211 04:33, 10 November 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.
