Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/copies from Halopedia

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 except Warthog. I wanted to say Merge to List of vehicles..., but as that article was AfDed before, I felt that wasn't a suitable close at this point. (No prejudice towards independent creation, of course.) Warthog is kept for its refs and examples of real-world relevance.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:54, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Halo gamecruft articles

Halopedia is a wiki on Wikia devoted to the Halo science fiction video game franchise. One user seems to think that we need cut-down versions of its articles over here. I say that they are much more at home in their own wiki. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:52, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I rewrote Warthog (Halo) from scratch, using as many good sources that I could find, but I'm still not conviced it passes the general notabiltiy guidelines. As the most iconic vehicle from that franchise, if that doesn't pass then the others certainly wont. I'm open to suggestions as to where to place Image:WarthogActionClix.JPG instead:> Marasmusine (talk) 09:48, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- On your own website or in Halopedia - obviously. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 11:24, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki to the Halo Wiki. Not notable outside their own franchise. Stifle (talk) 11:03, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
merge em all into Vehicles of Halo or some such. The Warthog one is decent, but not enough. I suspect the others can be gotten to a similar state, which would put the group over the GNG in my opinion. Hobit (talk) 12:51, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletions. Marasmusine (talk) 13:30, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki to Halopedia. Original research does not help pwn teh internets, and extensive plot summaries with primary sources is not l33t, nor does it likewise help in teh internets' major pwnage; it suxxorz. MuZemike (talk) 16:19, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments. There is no point saying "transwiki" - for the ones I have checked, these articles are already transwikifications from Halopedia. As for merging, please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of vehicles in the Halo universe. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:54, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. I'd personally call that a bad close, but wasn't around in 2006 so much. In any case, actual (moderate) sources are cited at this point. My sense of that discussion was that they didn't then. Hobit (talk) 20:36, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Soft-redirect - Ah you beat me to it RHaworth! I just checked and they are already in Halopedia. Maybe a soft-redirect is in order?--Pmedema (talk) 17:59, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think we generally do soft redirects to non-Wikimedia projects. Stifle (talk) 07:12, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect all or delete A probable redirect target could be Halo (series). I don't see these getting significant coverage from sources independent from Bungie et al. or getting any coverage that isn't largely gameguide info and plot recapitulation. Each title in the Halo series is a featured article so if there are sources that cover the vehicles in some detail suitable for an encyclopedia then they would be linked in the main articles. Protonk (talk) 03:46, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep/merge Keep the Warthog and merge the rest to Halo (series). Colonel Warden (talk) 16:49, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge any useful information and redirect to a main article. If the Warthog article can be expanded further then it could possibly make a decent article, otherwise the useful information can be put in a larger article. Bill ^{(talk|contribs)} 02:15, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into a new "List of Vehicles in Halo" group article. There seems to be growing consensus (including in discussions on the recent RFC for notability policies) that "spin-off" articles such as "List of" articles are appropriate. (Recent non-video-game example: WikiProject Television is apparently saying that "List of characters on TV Show" articles are now accepted where they weren't before. Perhaps at the time the original "List of vehicles in Halo" article was deleted, the consensus said such spinouts were inappropriate, but the consensus may have changed since then. I think it deserves another try, since Halo's vehicles as a whole have gained much attention, even if no one individual vehicle meets all the requirements. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 05:58, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- What consensus? So far i think not a single proposal has even 50% approval, including those for allowing sub-articles to be unsourced.Yobmod (talk) 11:11, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Maybe calling it a consensus is incorrect across all projects, but I've been seeing more people agreeing to the general idea that "spin-out" articles are okay, though people disagree on what rules should apply to them. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 15:34, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete ~~or Merge all into a new article per above~~. These are non-notable aspects of the game. Even a merged article would need sources though, which doesn't seem likely, so delete preferred. Actually, sourcing for old games using independant sources seems impossible, so a merged article would still have the same problems. Hence delete.Yobmod (talk) 11:06, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for a failure to address problems in previous AFD discussion, which was closed as delete. None of these articles have significant coverage in reliable third-party sources, and thus fail WP:N (and in most cases WP:V too). Aggregating them all into a single article only duplicates the past AFD discussion, and kicks the problems into a new article. Randomran (talk) 22:30, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or merge all per everyone as notable aspects of the game for meeting WP:N and WP:V. We have all sorts of articles that also appear in other encyclopedias, but that is no reason why we should not also cover them.--63.3.1.2 (talk) 15:09, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cirt (talk) 11:39, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge all articles to a section in the Halo (series) article, which need not be more than a few sentences long to outline that there are several vehicle types in the game. While my gut instinct tells me there are likely some sources for one or two of these for notability, this is basically similar to the old "Weapons of RE4" debate: all that can be described beyond their name and being in the game is details that are only pertinent to gamers, and thus fail the general gameguide approach. However, they are reasonable search terms so an area for redirect targets only makes sense. --MASEM 15:57, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge (1st choice) or delete (2nd choice). Halo is one of the most notable series in gaming history, but the individual weapons, vehicles, and such belong in lists. Delete only if merge meets resistance or otherwise fails. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 16:29, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Most of these articles are stubs that cannot be expanded and their topics fail notability. Their creation seems to be an attempt to circumvent the deletion of this list. VG ☎ 17:54, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
delete as merging these would just lead to the same notability problems in the old afd on the list that led to deleting it in the first place... 99.251.171.248 (talk) 16:35, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Halo (series). The articles lack importance. Redirect to avoid broken links from external (and internal, if enough) locations. --Super Shy Guy Bros.Not shy? 23:46, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. Hiding T 12:52, 6 October 2008 (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.