Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Legends of Wrestling characters
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
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 no consensus. Not enough of a strong consensus for deletion at this point in time, certainly, however, efforts should be made to improve the quality of WP:RS secondary sourcing at the page. -- Cirt (talk) 05:53, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- List of Legends of Wrestling characters (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Trivial listcruft at best. Legends of Wrestling is a sports game series, which has similar rosters. Just like a Madden game for example: we don't list every person in that, so this is no different. RobJ1981 (talk) 04:43, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. -- Jujutacular talk 05:08, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. -- Jujutacular talk 05:10, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. (Search video game sources) • Gene93k (talk) 19:41, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:42, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:42, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Video games aren't my area, but it seems to me that the player characters in a video game are a significant aspect of that game, particularly where the basis of the characters on real people is one of the selling points of the game. The list is verifiable and discriminate (the games did not simply feature all known wrestlers), most of the wrestler player characters have their own articles, and the list cross-compares what characters are available in which game in the series. Re: a Madden game (which are football games licensed by the NFL, right?), I'd imagine the list would be far less discriminate simply because the number of player characters increases significantly with team sports games, and might include every player then in the NFL, so I don't know if that's a good comparison. The Madden game article could then state "available players included all members of the 2008 season of the NFL" or whatever and that would be sufficient information. postdlf (talk) 20:37, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete or merge to Legends of Wrestling (series). Series article is short enough to handle this list if it passes WP:GNG, which I seriously doubt it will. --Teancum (talk) 23:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Merging into the series article seems like a viable option, as it's not too long to handle it. Passing GNG is not a requirement for a single section within an article. postdlf (talk) 15:04, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:VGSCOPE: this is a list of gameplay entities. Marasmusine (talk) 10:54, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - The link you cite doesn't say anything about gameplay entities. It says that listing the weights and moves of the characters is inappropriate, and that listing the people who provide voices to the game is unnecessary. It says nothing about omitting information about something as important as which characters are in the game. GaryColemanFan (talk) 14:13, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- It is based on the "indiscriminate information" policy. I consider this list to fall under criteria #3 of that policy. Marasmusine (talk) 13:52, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - The link you cite doesn't say anything about gameplay entities. It says that listing the weights and moves of the characters is inappropriate, and that listing the people who provide voices to the game is unnecessary. It says nothing about omitting information about something as important as which characters are in the game. GaryColemanFan (talk) 14:13, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Essential information, and comparing this list to an NFL roster is obviously absurd due to the differences in size. As a note, merging this is not a viable option, since the nominator deletes these lists from wrestling video game articles based on his misinterpretation of WP:GAMEGUIDE (which, incidentally, doesn't seem to exist other than as a redirect to a page that doesn't mention anything relevant. GaryColemanFan (talk) 14:06, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: Rosters/character lists for wrestling games have been discussed several times. See the following discussions: ([1], [2], [3]). Consensus can change, but policies shouldn't be ignored. RobJ1981 (talk) 16:11, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: This is essential information that is consistent with other video game list of characters. Feedback ☎ 16:58, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep with merge as a second choice. Reasonable breakout artivle. We get back to what lists are appropriate and what form of notability is needed for a list. I think it's reasonable as long as it isn't a guide to playing the game. This isn't trivia... Hobit (talk) 19:55, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:VGSCOPE: Seriously....--UnquestionableTruth-- 22:54, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to Wikia. Wikia is where game cruft belongs. SharkD Talk 04:37, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:SALAT & WP:GAMEGUIDE - roster lists aren't appropriate for Wikipedia.陣内Jinnai 04:22, 21 September 2010 (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.