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 no consensus to delete, and no consensus to merge and/or redirect. If you wish for this article to be merged/redirected still, please propose it editorially. Daniel 05:45, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Magna Carta (video game)[edit]

Magna Carta (video game) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

I have marked it for deletion because it's about a game that already has 2 sub-articles to it. It is un-monitored and un-edited for a long time and tehre is only 1 thing in the discussion page that offers a suggestion for it's deletion. url: www.freelancebusinessman.com 15:59, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep. This article seems to function as, in effect, a disambiguation page for the games in this series. The fact that the two games in the series each have better articles does not seem to be a reason to delete this short article about the series as a whole. --Metropolitan90 17:10, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Metropolitan90. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 17:10, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Magna Carta: Crimson Stigmata It's a 2-article disambig (redundant) pretending to be an article (also redundant). One of the games is Korean-only whereas the European release of Crimson Stigmata/Tears of Blood is just called Magna Carta, making Magna Carta (video game) a logical redirect. Should further games be released or the material become available to actually write about the series then the redirect can be undone. The other game is also wiki-linked in MC:CS' lead. Someone another 09:54, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletions. -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gavin.collins (talk • contribs) 10:20, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. No reason to redirect to one or the other game (ROK only games are still notable). While the quality is low no policies (or even, AFAICT, guidelines) are violated by simply keeping it. Eluchil404 09:42, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect, as per, but to Magna Carta: The Phantom of Avalanche as it is the first of the two games. Coversion to a disambiguation page would be OK, but it should not remain as an article unless it can be expanded substantially beyond the content of the two other articles. --SmokeyJoe 23:07, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]