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 Keep, the argument on the delete side was that there is already a category for the topic, which is not a substantial argument when we have a list of dog breeds that also has a category. The article can be improved, perhaps by using a table format and adding more information, and it needs references. However just because that hasn't been done yet isn't a good enough argument to make for it to be deleted. Chetblong (talk) 15:49, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of Macintosh games[edit]

List of Macintosh games (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Delete for two reasons. Firstly, eight months after being tagged as unreferenced, none of it is sourced. Secondly categories are much more suited to collecting data like this. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 15:03, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:USEFUL. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 22:53, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't spit non-policies in my face. SashaNein (talk) 02:52, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And you believe that WP:DEADLINE is a policy? AlistairMcMillan (talk) 20:12, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Eh. She didn't introduce WP:DEADLINE as an imperative. Protonk (talk) 01:38, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CLN is a guideline, not a policy. WP:V is policy. Also there is NO extra detail in the article that wouldn't be found in a category, it is just a simple list of article links. Nothing else. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 00:57, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is called a navigational list. Have a good read of WP:LISTS especially Wikipedia:LISTS#Navigation. They are a major part of wikipedia navigation and do not conflict with categories. It is the consensus of the community that neither should be nominated for deletion on grounds of overlap. --neon white talk 15:06, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
BTW Who considers it "disruptive behaviour"? AlistairMcMillan (talk) 01:06, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll ask again, who considers it disruptive? Given that I've nominated a bunch of similar articles which have all been successfully deleted I am looking for a specific place where this consensus was reached. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 20:12, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Don't mention the other useful list, else he'll go on a crusade to have that notable list removed as well. SashaNein (talk) 02:53, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Don't tempt me. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 20:12, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The list is not indiscriminate, it has clear criteria in line with guidelines. Again categories and lists do not compete with each other. --neon white talk 15:08, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And what exactly is that criteria? Is the criteria simply games that run on a Mac? Is it games that run on current Macs? If it is simply every game that runs on a Mac, do we include games that run within emulators like VirtualPC? How about games that run in WINE? AlistairMcMillan (talk) 20:12, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The stated criteria is "Macintosh video games available for any version of Mac OS in native mode" --neon white talk 23:17, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And you don't see any difference between those lists which include other information which can't be included in a category and this one which is just simply a list of article links? AlistairMcMillan (talk) 20:12, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, that's the equivalent of deleting a page because it's a stub. Nifboy (talk) 02:16, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is valid navigational list, fully complying with guidelines guidelines. --neon white talk 22:12, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Like I said at the top, the article has been tagged for eight months as unreferenced and eight months and approximately forty edits later it still has zero references. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 23:01, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CLN explains why lists and categories are considered both valid and neither preferred. --neon white talk 22:14, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • And now to contradict what I just said, Deletion policy states that These processes are not decided through a head count, so participants are encouraged to explain their opinion and refer to policy. The discussion lasts at least five days; afterwards, pages are deleted by an administrator if there is consensus to do so. If there is no rough consensus, the page is kept and is again subject to normal editing, merging or redirecting as appropriate. MuZemike (talk) 18:35, 1 July 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.
More