The result was keep. Consensus is clearly against deletion and the keep arguments are reasonable (mainly reliant on WP:NLIST), although I'll tag this as "maintenance needed" as the concerns about overly broad inclusion criteria and other maintenance problems have significant support here as well even among people who argue for keeping. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:47, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
Too broad of a list. There are hundreds of fictitious games, and it is constantly growing. Furthermore, what makes these notable? It serves no encyclopedic purpose. And imdb is practically the only source in the whole article. Similar articles have been deleted in the past (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional films (3rd nomination)) JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 04:43, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
From 1st nomination
|
---|
After skimming the contents, I see that this is a concern — the size and contents of the list lends weight to the WP:SALAT concern of being too broad.
The source cited looks very unreliable. I doubt that this has actual naviagtion value since many of these games aren't even mentioned in the respective articles about the works, or anywhere else.
The delete half of this argument is essentially the same as the nominator's, and this nominator's. As for the keep half, we are not a place for trying things out.
Not a policy-based argument to keep. The final remark is probably false; I haven't looked that closely, but most of these items are the exact opposite.
If we trimmed this, there would be very little content left. |
In conclusion, none of the Keep arguments hold substantial weight. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:00, 26 May 2019 (UTC)