Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of units in the Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War series

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. Apparently transwikied. Sandstein 19:49, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of units in the Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War series[edit]

These units have not established notability to justify their own article. This violates wikipedia's policy on notability, particularly the general notability guideline that calls for coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject itself. The general notability guideline has been adapted into the specific guideline on WP:VGSCOPE, which excludes lists of weapons and items from inclusion in wikipedia. Randomran (talk) 23:32, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game related deletions. MrKIA11 (talk) 01:38, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete against video game policy (No weapon lists). Atyndall93 | talk 04:36, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - textbook case of WP:NOT#GUIDE. Asserts no notability also and fails WP:NOT#INFO and WP:FICT. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:46, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Listcruft. Not encyclopedic. Axl (talk) 06:47, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Repetition of in-game content without any discussion that is not instrumental to understand the game. User:Krator (t c) 10:50, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as an unencyclopedic list. Alexius08 is welcome to talk about his contributions. 12:47, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki The WH40K project seems to have a system set up for this.[1] This list is not encyclopedic, but it's probably exhaustive and well-written enough that another wiki would want it, assuming they haven't copied it already. Ham Pastrami (talk) 12:58, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki and Delete. This article definitely constitutes Gamecruft: the information is useful only to those who play the game. ZappyGun, his (empty) talk page, and what he has done for Wikipedia. 13:33, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Wikipedia:Lists (discriminate, encyclopedic, incredibly well-organized, and verifiable article concerning a major aspect of a notable game series that even provides the context of the list). Not what you would find in a game guide as it is not a how to. WP:ITSCRUFT is not a valid argument and as even in a worst case scenario, this legitimate search term that is not a hoax, copy vio, or libel can be redirected without having the contribution history deleted. So, really a merge or redirect discussion, but no reason to outright delete. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 17:10, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We delete articles that were made in good faith all the time. If you have a problem with deleting articles made in good faith, please take your discussion to WP:deletion policy. Otherwise, a failure to meet WP:N *is* a reason to delete, not just for hoaxes or legal problems. No one has provided evidence that this topic is notable by using proper references. Randomran (talk) 17:32, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure that we all agree that it isn't a hoax, copyvio or libel. Rather the article describes a list (or a list of tables), breaching point number 3 here. Axl (talk) 17:41, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, a clear breach of WP:NOT#GUIDE, and although I will give it credit for being better organised than these things usually are, this stuff belongs in the game's instruction manual, not in an encyclopedia. I'd support a transwiki though, as it is well suited to the Wikias. -- Sabre (talk) 17:31, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOT#GUIDE. That said, it should be transwikied where players of the game can make use of it, and it is a nicely written and formatted list. Edison (talk) 19:12, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki As per previous comments supporting this action. It would be a major waste to just delete it. Ecoleetage (talk) 19:59, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Transwiki'd to StrategyWiki:Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War with full edit history. -- Prod (Talk) 05:35, 29 May 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.