Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Cosmic Encounter powers

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. Secret ^account 01:37, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of Cosmic Encounter powers

This is simply a list of powers in a game and does not appear to be appropriate to Wikipedia. It seems to be more of a game guide item. Slavlin (talk) 05:14, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOT#GUIDE. THe article was created because tidying up the Cosmic Encounter article annoyed a blogger who insisted we keep the information, and I've only haven't AFDed it myself because I wanted to avoid aggravating them.. Percy Snoodle (talk) 07:55, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related-related deletion discussions. —Percy Snoodle (talk) 10:03, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge back into Cosmic Encounter article. Colonel Warden (talk) 12:21, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Question Is there really any content there worth saving that isn't already in the summary in Cosmic Encounter? Remember, wikipedia is not a game guide. Percy Snoodle (talk) 12:38, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes. It seems that your removal of this material from the main article did not have consensus support, as its talk page indicates. Colonel Warden (talk) 12:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Rather, I'd say that TheDukester didn't care about the guidelines (especially WP:CIVIL). The guidelines say that WP isn't for game guides, and they do have consensus support. Percy Snoodle (talk) 13:10, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - The game guide guideline is not applicable as this list of powers is not a "how-to" or recap of the rules. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Colonel Warden (talk • contribs) 18:21, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        I didn't say it was a good game guide. It lists the various powers in various editions of the game. Just because it's only a guide to one part of those games, it doesn't mean it isn't a game guide. Percy Snoodle (talk) 11:23, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The inclusion of noting which of the game's many versions each power appeared in elevates this above game guide or indiscriminate list; it actually has value for people looking for Cosmic Encounter information that reading the game rules can't provide. The length keeps merging from being entirely satisfactory, as that will bloat the original article. As far as it not being edited since its split from the main article, I note that there are absolutely no links from the Cosmic Encounter article to this one; is there any wonder it withered after being separated? Ig8887 (talk) 15:50, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment there's one in the middle of the Gameplay section. Percy Snoodle (talk) 16:25, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, OK. I see it now. Well, its placement is still pretty poor and easily overlooked. At any rate, that doesn't change my opinion that the article has merit on its own. Ig8887 (talk) 17:22, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOT#GUIDE, maybe something can be add in the article Cosmic Encounter about the most important powers (but not in a list, i e : no merging) -- Cenarium (talk) 17:13, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's unlikely to be any way of determining which powers are "most important" that isn't Original Research. The game values them all equally, making any assertion of importance tough to back up.Ig8887 (talk) 17:22, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So, why some powers are more detailed than others ? In the event of deletion, it won't be possible to list all these powers in the Cosmic Encounter article so if we follow what you say, no examples of powers can be given in this article, it's : all or none. But giving examples is necessary to an encyclopedia under some circumstances, is it necessary here ? -- Cenarium (talk) 17:56, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In fact they are already examples of powers in the article, so it's settled. -- Cenarium (talk) 17:58, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An example is not the same thing as "most important". The powers that currently have additional information are more or less at random, based on what individual editors decided to add. If this article gets deleted, then yes, a few examples should be added back into the main article, but there should not be any assertion that those examples are the "most important" powers, because they aren't. Ig8887 (talk) 21:13, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Not notable. Madman (talk) 18:24, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Very Weak Keep. Frankly, only because I find the list interesting and useful (I didn't know about all of the editions or that the on-line game added some stuff.) Not a good policy reason (ILIKEIT), but I found it interesting and I suspect others would too. Needs sourcing badly and I'd be somewhat surprised if anyone could find such sources. If someone could, I'd go all the way to "weak keep" :-) Hobit (talk) 20:41, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, if this does get deleted, would the closing admin mind moving it to my user space? I'd like to keep the info... Thanks! Hobit (talk) 20:44, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can save the page (in HTML, or copy it) or retrieve the information on an official site. -- Cenarium (talk) 22:22, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but I'd like the edit history and stuff too if possible. Hobit (talk) 00:54, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, Wikipedia is not a webhost. Slavlin (talk) 03:02, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, but fix and transwiki might work. I'm not sure yet... Hobit (talk) 04:05, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Articles like these are why God invented Wikia. --Dachannien^Talk_Contrib 07:50, 19 January 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.