Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2-in-1 Super Mario Bros./Duck Hunt

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was KEEP. dbenbenn | talk 23:50, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The votes were 6 delete, 10 keep.

2-in-1 Super Mario Bros./Duck Hunt
Not really necessary. It's really two games in one, and I feel that it should be deleted or something else. -- AllyUnion (talk) 23:23, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete -- AllyUnion (talk) 23:23, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - I'd forgotten about that actually... ahh, my mis-spent youth. --Irishpunktom\talk 15:59, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. All of this information (the little there is) is already included in Nintendo Entertainment System.  The cartridge itself never had an official name, let alone this one, so a redirect is pointless.  And I would question something being considered "best selling" if it was never individually sold.  Does that make baseball card pack bubblegum the best selling gum?  --Plutor 17:21, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree with Plutor. Delete. DS 17:28, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, cleanup and expand. Megan1967 05:06, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. This isn't even a game.  It's just a packaging together of two different games.  If either is notable, it should have a separate article.   But what is the point of an article about the bundle?   Are we going to have new article whenever a game company comes out with some bundle of old games. --BM 18:17, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand. --Matteh (talk) 19:17, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. In this case, this particular packaged game bundle was extremely noteworthy and did much for the sales of the console (and vice-versa).  GRider\talk 19:19, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. The individual games might be encyclopedic.  The marketing choice to sell them together is not.  Rossami (talk) 04:10, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand. This isn't just the usual 2-in-1 package game-- it's of historical importance. --TheCoffee 05:46, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, agree with GRider. This is not "some bundle of old games" that was put out recently, but rather something that was sold in the 80s when the NES was popular.  Although the vast majority of game compilations would not be notable, this one is. Dave6 06:59, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and Expand Beta_M talk, |contrib ( &Euml;-Mail )
 * Keep. —Mar·ka·ci: 2005-02-3 04:04 Z
 * Keep--Xadai 02:06, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Agree with above "Keep" opinions. EVERYBODY had this cartridge. TomTheHand 06:41, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, it's NOT of historical importance. ral315 21:55, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.