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 transwiki and delete. Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 00:33, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of Advance Wars COs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

This article is currently--and, from what I can tell from watching it/checking the history, has always been--little more than a collection of fancruft related to the Nintendo Wars series of games. As such, it violates a number of policies, chief among them notability and no original research. Wikipedia is not a guide, and so I'm nominating it for deletion or possible transwikiing to StrategyWiki. jonny-mt 01:52, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Nintendo Wars; the bulk of the useful info here (such that there is) is already in the individual game articles. I keep meaning to redirect it, and keep forgetting to. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:18, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This page was made to avoid having to have a large subsection on all of the Nintendo Wars pages (most notably Advance Wars 1, 2, and Dual Strike). I see what you're saying with the violation of policies, but it's not original research, I can source my Nintendo Power guide if needed. There has been a great effort in keeping it encyclopedic and not guide-like (which in my opinion would be something more like "Sami has 130/100 Infantry, 90/100 non-Infantry ground units, and 100/100 otherwise. Her COP increases her attack by [...]"). I think, with revision and the addition of sources, this page can meet WP:N and WP:NOR. Could you list some examples of fancruft? <3 bunny 03:44, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • But of course. The most obvious examples of fancruft are also the items that belong in strategy guides; these can be found under virtually every subheading. For example...

Andy - "On the battlefield, his units have no strengths or weaknesses. His CO and Super CO Powers, Hyper Repair and Hyper Upgrade, restore health to his units, while Hyper Upgrade also increases the firepower and movement abilities of his units."

Jake - "His CO and Super CO Powers, Beat Down and Block Rock, give movement bonuses to his vehicular units, range bonuses to his indirect-combat units, and even greater attack power on open plains."

Sami - "She specializes in infantry units; as such, they have higher attack power, and can capture properties more quickly. Her transport units also have increased movement. However, her non-infantry direct combat units are slightly weaker. Her CO and Super CO Powers, Double Time and Victory March, give her soldiers extra movement and strength. Victory March also gives soldiers the ability to capture a building in one turn regardless of health."

And so on. I think you'll find that after removing this stuff, there really isn't enough material for a standalone article. --jonny-mt 04:11, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or redirect to Nintendo Wars. Fancruft/clutter, and Wikipedia isn't a game guide. RobJ1981 (talk) 17:30, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and there is no assertion of notability. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 17:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Per nom. Earthbendingmaster 17:45, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This is notable due to the sheer scale of the Advance Wars series and I completely agree with the comment that it would be more of a table if it were a game guide. However, it does need to be carefully referenced and not just from one source as that could bring in copyright issues. Skip1337 (talk) 20:05, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete While I have issues with some of the reasons for this article's deletion, I suppose it is for the best. In that case, though, shouldn't List of Advance Wars: Days of Ruin COs also be deleted? Both pages do contain the same general info about AW characters; the only thing distinguishing the first article from the second is that the second was created for characters of a different storyline in the series. Comandante42 (talk) 20:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The Wikipedia is not a game guide, as most of you say as do I. Supergodzilla^20|90 00:19, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The games can easily cover the important characters within their CO sections and/or plot sections. This list is unnecessary, and it definitely is filled with cruft and game guide material. TTN (talk) 01:58, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per not game guide. A transwiki somewhere might be best Corpx (talk) 08:19, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep because if anyone here's gunning for deletion of this article might as well trash the one about Days of Ruins COs - or even those about other videogames' character lists! I may not be saying this in a wikipedia-friendly manner (this being the first time I'm involved in an AfD debate), but I say that your so-called definition of negligible content is pretty questionable. Unlike Comandante42, I'm not convinced you're doing this in good faith. Pasonia (talk) 10:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, technically "assuming good faith" means assuming that the people here who want the article deleted want that done for the good of the project overall--you can completely disagree with our reasons for doing so if you want. As for the item you mentioned, I think you're completely right, although given that that article has already been tagged for merging it's probably best to just let that run its course. --jonny-mt 13:52, 1 February 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.