Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Algol (Phantasy Star)


 * 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   redirect to Phantasy Star. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 03:44, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Algol (Phantasy Star)

 * – (View AfD (View log  •  AfD statistics)

I really don't think any of this article is notable. Entirely plot summary with no references. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 03:33, 7 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - subject is a fictional planetary system used in multiple popular games. The level of detail is likely a bit excessive, but the proper amount of detail would still be too much to comfortably merge.  As such this is a valid sub-article, in my opinion. --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:54, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Coffee //  have a cup  //  ark  // 21:34, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete the lack of reliable third party references (not fan pages), for this or the main article, point to it not being notable enough OUTSIDE the hardcore fan community for it to have this detail. if a setting or character had been adopted in mainstream culture, if a movie had been made, even a reference to the game within a movie, that would help. for me, and i believe for WP, the justification for details about a fictional world is the significance of that fictional world in the real world. shakespeares plays and the star wars movies provide strong examples of fictional characters and settings affecting the real world. of course, we dont even need the whole world affected. if it was a cliche in the mmorpg community to say "oh, thats so phantasy star" or "feels like algol" and everyone knew what it meant that hadnt even played the game, ok. i still have not heard a good reason for excessive details of fictional worlds on WP. yes, they "exist" in the games, and the details are notable within the game. but not to 99.9% of humanity, which is the target audience for WP.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:03, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. Nifboy (talk) 06:43, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Phantasy Star, to which I've given a small paragraph about Algol surveying the two key points (Palma destroyed in PS2, colony ship = PS3). Otherwise, the series plays relatively fast and loose with the continuity, and so there isn't a lot to say other than "Here's how X planet was in PS1, PS2, and PS4". The various satellites and Rykros are all one-shot locations, not really within WP:VGSCOPE. Nifboy (talk) 07:32, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge to Phantasy Star, either to the "Common elements" section or as its own section. MuZemike 17:58, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:WAF and WP:N. Such fictional details should be briefly included in the plot synopsis of the game articles. Marasmusine (talk) 11:11, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep as relevant to the universe of multiple games and their stories. But bolster with appropriate references. - Gilgamesh (talk) 16:58, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Redirect/merge per Nifboy. Contra Gilgamesh, no "appropriate references" seem available to make this into a proper article. cab (talk) 05:31, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Why is "appropriate references" in quotes? I was being serious.  References can be links to online maps, scripts, etc., with excerpts put in reference list for relevance. - Gilgamesh (talk) 13:46, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Nifboy, has been dealt with appropriately considering it's way outside of WP:VGSCOPE. Someoneanother 23:19, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect - Nifboy's suggestion seems the most sensible, Lord Spongefrog,  (I am Czar of all Russias!)  21:59, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * 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.