Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Sandbox/Games

Wikipedia:Sandbox/Games

For a lot of good reasoning, see the MFD for Esperanza coffee lounge games. Basically, these detract from spending time on what Wikipedia really is for, they are unencyopedic, and I find the argument for Word Association that "it helps teach how to link and you can learn alot from links" very feeble. Not to mention some of these are defunct and are basically a waste of space. DoomsDay349 01:08, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, in addition, these includes all the games linked on the page and all archives of those games. There're too many to list. DoomsDay349 01:09, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. → crazytales (t·c) 02:05, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The word game in the sandbox do little harm. They mostly involve brief contributions to list of words and as such take little time away from editing elsewhere. The games can be informative when someone follows a link because they have no knowledge of the previous word/topic. The occasional distraction is no bad thing and probably helps to calm tempers around the project. It may not be necessary to keep so many archives of past games however... WJBscribe ^{(WJB talk)} 02:36, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- On a different side of the coin, the games do little good. DoomsDay349 02:44, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - As an unrelated remark- nominating the sandbox games for deletion on Christmas Day! Now that is a new way to spread seasonal cheer... WJBscribe ^{(WJB talk)} 02:57, 26 December 2006 (UTC
    - Bah humbug! Indigestion, indigestion... :) Seriously though, if that actually offended someone I'm sorry but I just happened to notice it today. DoomsDay349 03:20, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all. I am aware that there are a substantial number of editors who believe there should be some forum for game-playing on Wikipedia. I'm not going to address that here, as I don't think its actually germane to this MFD. Instead, I'll point out that the Sandbox itself says that it is for testing and that "this page is automatically cleaned every hour". I view the existence of persistent sandbox subpages as a weakness in the capabilities of the automatic refresh and not a desireable feature, regardless of their content. Serpent's Choice 02:42, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Games, Delete Archives per WJBscribe. These pages have no harmful effect to the rest of the encyclopedia or to its editors. Participating in these games require only a small amount of your time. All of the games have some sort of benefit to the Wikipedia editors or the articles they create. For example, Word Association increases the editors' awareness of articles that they never even read before. The game exposes writers to articles of different topics they were never even interested before. On a side note, the archives are unnecessary, and should be deleted.--Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 02:51, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I didn't even point this out, but per WP:NOT, Wikipedia is not a social networking site. Tell me, what does it mean to play games with other people? I believe that's called social networking. WP:NOT makes no distinction over whether you network for two minutes or two hours. It simply shouldn't be done on Wikipedia. DoomsDay349 03:23, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I thought it should be noted in case people want to refer to the debate that the Word Association games were recently subject of an MfD (on Nov 13, 2006). The result was no concensus. WJBscribe ^{(WJB talk)} 02:57, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Archives, do whatever you like to them, but the game itself, keep it, for a lot of the reasons listed abovePYLrulz 03:13, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sheesh. Does the No Fun Brigade never rest? I'm glad I don't have to work for these people... lots of good editors play these games, I guess, although I don't. The mind needs a rest at times, you know. By the way, when I work on the Wikipedia, I have a humourous figurine on top of my monitor. May I keep it, or should I remove it when I edit the Wikipedia? Because, you know, God forbid anyone should have fun while working on the project. Herostratus 03:27, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- You should be able to entertain yourself just fine off-wiki. If you come to an encyclopedia for fun, you have issues. DoomsDay349 03:28, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - I have a question for you Dooms. Havent you ever looked through some of the page (especially when you got some good lists going on), and clicked on a few links to pages that, had you not come across them on the Word Association game, you would of never came across? Heck, theres even some stuff that, through this game, I never would of thought of associating with, or something I never knew before. In a way, as long as it isnt abused, this page can sometimes actually serve some kind of encyclopedic purpose, even if its just finding out stuff you can associate with and learn.PYLrulz 03:40, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - If I had wanted to learn something I would have simply put it into the search box. I wouldn't go play a word association game to learn some random things about random articles. To answer your question,no I have not done so. DoomsDay349 03:52, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - I'm not saying, think of something, go to the Word Association page, find it, and look at it, im saying your just filing through, see something intresting, and going to the article.PYLrulz 04:02, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        Two words. Special:Random. Same task without the networking. DoomsDay349 04:04, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        True, but thats just throwing a dart with a blindfold on, sometimes, its fun filing though the list to find an article that catches your eye.PYLrulz 04:07, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        If you're looking for a topic you like, you could just search or go to a category, or even Reference Desk. DoomsDay349 04:14, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        The Sandbox Games do that with a fun twist to it.--Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 04:22, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of which the fun twist is social networking, which is expressly forbidden. DoomsDay349 04:24, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- In that case, what better way to know other wikipedians to maybe find someone to help you with a certain project on wikipedia. Personally, I really dont get how someone could be against this. Stuff like this where you got fun involved can lighten up the mood, especially if someone is pissed or something.PYLrulz 05:08, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Are you kidding me? Someone already tried to get this deleted and it didn't happen. Lighten up! This game is a great way to find new articles, and a good stress reliever for Wikipedians who need something light and fun. I truly cannot believe we're going through this waste of time again. Underorbit 05:18, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, WP:NOT a social network. BigDT 06:35, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Deletion attempts of these games have occurred at least three times now. I get really tired of people telling me what wikipedia is and is not for. I think these games are a great addition to the encyclopedia and remind me of how in many ways Wikipedia is better than a normal encyclopedia, in that they have these fun, interactive components to them. Vertigo700 06:43, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- And one final thing to add, to add to Vertigo's comment, dont take things too seriously, you gotta have some fun along the way.PYLrulz 10:02, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, we can have some fun while editing this encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not just only a normal encyclopedia, there are a lot of things too. Sometimes let's just be more flexible and let things like games happen here. Fun is needed here or else it will be another serious encyclopedia. Let's just leave this type of stuff alone. For the archives, delete them it is not useful at all. Ter e nc e Ong 14:58, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: NOT AGAIN!!!!!! This has been through about 2 AfDs and each one was a keep. Simply south 17:21, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete it All per nom. — Arjun 18:21, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]