Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Game developer
Appearance
- Game developer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
This article is almost devoid of useful content, e.g. one should already know that "A board game developer designs board games". Unfortunately, I do not see any way that this article can be improved, anything that I could think of as worth saying on this topic is either coverable or covered by other more specific pages. After all a board game developer and a video game developer are very much not the same thing. Eldar 01:03, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete and re-make as a disambiguation page. The article does link to Game Developer Magazine, and Video Game Developer, so that seems a good use for this title. Thus if "board game developer" ever warrants an article, the DAB page is there. Otherwise, delete due to lack of any meaningful content beyond simple restatement of the sub-headings. Arakunem 01:19, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Reads like a sub-standard dictionary using circular definitions. Renee 02:46, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete - per nom. Perhaps Wiktionary is the right place for this. IT'S DA...Ανέκδοτο 02:47, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete & Make into DAB - I did get a game box for hide and seek one time and it had a game developer's name on it... ;) As per Arakunem, Game Developer should be made into a disambiguation page, because as it stands, it's a useless article... Spawn Man 03:14, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete and make DAB per the above. The article as it stands has got to. Bfigura (talk) 03:41, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Concur: convert to DAB. Alba 14:32, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Make into DAB. Concur. Not much can be said on this page that isn't covered in more detail in other pages that it could point to. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 15:48, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- DAB. Per above. • Lawrence Cohen 16:53, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- DAB obviously is the right thing to do, as the entropy of X game developer designs X games indeed is not very high :) --Allefant 10:11, 27 September 2007 (UTC)