Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Humble Bundles (2nd nomination)

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, with no prejudice against WP:USERFICATION.

A clear consensus for deletion of this article from main namespace has occurred at this time, essentially as per WP:NOTCATALOG. That said, several users here have stated that various alternate uses of the content exists ("Some of the more notable bundles would be better merged with the main article... ", "Delete (or possibly userify... ", "I would probably say the ones worth noting would be the first few... ", "It seems like the info is useful and could be saved and transwikied somewhere... "). As such, there is no prejudice in this close for the article's content to be provided via WP:USERFICATION, if anyone asks for userfication for said purposes. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:35, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of Humble Bundles

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Page is currently a indiscriminate set of listing with many games/items failing notability. Some of the more notable bundles would be better merged with the main article but the majority would need to be deleted Jamesbuc (talk) 09:27, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:59, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:59, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (or possibly userify to strip down to most essential content). With Humble offering two or more weekly bundles, and its monthly service, this starts to become akin to a catalog. I know I likely was involved when this article started, but that was when they only offered a bundle a few times a years, and each bundle got an impressive amount of coverage. Today that simply doesn't happen. I feel there are some parts to this that can be salvaged as suggested by nominator, but I don't know what immediately, hence userification if that can't be figured out during this AFD. --Masem (t) 13:51, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This entire article is a basic fail of WP:NOTCATALOGUE. Ajf773 (talk) 21:21, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As I said when I nominated the category for this information for deletion years ago Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 July 30, it isn't that hard to get a game included on this. Some news do mention when a game is available cheap, be it a bundle somewhere or alone, but that doesn't mean this list is notable or needed. Also what would anyone do with this information? Can't go back in time and buy something in an old bundle of the past. Dream Focus 04:54, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- The first few bundles drew rather large figures for charity and put some games' source into open source. They are historically significant, but not most of the rest of the bundles since. Hence some value but not enough for a list. --Masem (t) 05:00, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I would probably say the ones worth noting would be the first few, the THQ bundle made shortly before they went under, the first Nintendo and Playstation bundles and a brief mention of when they began doing other bundles (first ebook, first mobile bundle etc). Jamesbuc (talk) 09:00, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- This page was useful to analyze the evolution of content featured in Humble Monthly bundles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wok (talk • contribs) 12:03, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per argument I made 3 years ago at previous AfD. Nothing has changed since then. Page is still a mess and doesn't belong on Wikipedia. --The1337gamer (talk) 21:52, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above, the page is turning into a catalogue and has no place on wikipedia. There's simply too much information to include on something like this, especially when the page could theoretically go on for as long as they continue doing them. The article is also very long, clocking in at over 400k bytes, and the list could go on indefinitely.--QueerFilmNerd (talk) 00:31, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It seems like the info is useful and could be saved and transwikied somewhere, but remaining on Wikipedia, not so much. It obviously goes against WP:NOTCATALOGUE._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 20:25, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.