Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allied technology of Command & Conquer


 * 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 DELETE. -- Balloonman (talk) 22:30, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Allied technology of Command &amp; Conquer

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

I tagged this for merging on 25 October, in case someone was interested, but this entire article is filled with in-universe or game guide information and there isn't really much worth saving. Delete or transwiki, if someone is willing.  Pagra shtak  19:04, 11 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions.  Pagra shtak  19:06, 11 November 2007 (UTC)


 * delete Game cruft. Not a single reference, let alone a reliable secondary source to establish the encyclopedic notability of this topic.  WP:N must be satisified by an WP:RS secondary source, this comes no where close.  Transwiki it if you like, but this is essentially a fan essay, and just doesn't belong in an encyclopedia, be it paper or not. Pete.Hurd 19:35, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Other than the games, game manuals, the developer blogs, offical website, and what not? --Eldarone 02:20, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete No point keeping. The C&C wiki already has these--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 19:58, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, no the CNC Wikia dosn't. The EVA Databasse is totally In-universe, and does not provide any  factual context.  We assumed Wikipedia was a better source for contextual information. --Eldarone 02:20, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. It is hard to imagine how this topic could be in any way notable and the article certainly does not establish notability. This article belongs on a fan site, not in an encyclopedia. Gaius Cornelius 08:29, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Provides important context to the game's universe. It's no more different than disciribin gthe fictional sciences of Star Trek, or providing some info on characters. --Eldarone 02:20, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep - article has been tagged for less than a month, give it time for editors who discover the cleanup templates to address them. Relist in the future and if it's still garbage, delete it then. MalikCarr 08:18, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The only cleanup needed is deletion. There's nothing worth merging.  Pagra shtak  15:27, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per MalikCarr. IIRC several articles like this one on the same general topic exist and need to be merged-- mabye leave a note on WP:Videogames or whatever? Jtrainor 08:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The VG project has been notified—I stated that above.  Pagra shtak  15:27, 13 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep = For reasons already stated from above. --Eldarone 19:32, 13 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete No real world context, no sourcing other than from game manuals. Re the "give it more time" argument; it has already had time - a year and a half since creation, a couple of weeks since being tagged for a merge, and the five day duration of this AfD, which is more than enough time in itself to find sources. If there are such sources just post the links here, you don't have to rewrite the article or anything.  Mi re ma re  19:47, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Not just game manuals, but also offical websites, game guides, game previews, interviews, etc. etc. --Eldarone 03:16, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * "Official" sources don't count for establishing notability as they are not independent of the subject. Blogs and gameguides are also not suitable as they are not reliable.  Mi re ma re  15:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete This article serves no purpose in an encyclopedia. My reasoning mirrors Miremare's. DurinsBane87 —Preceding comment was added at 01:30, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * It does provide vitial information on the setting. --Eldarone 02:20, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - once again, here's a novel concept...delete in terms of policy: this article fails WP:N, WP:V and WP:RS...outside the game manual, there's no references other than one blog (hardly a RS), and there's no demonstration from outside sources that this subject is actually notable in an encyclopedic way.  AK Radecki Speaketh  03:04, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Unluess you forgot to mention the Official Website (http://www.ea.com/official/cc/redalert2/english/gameinfo.jsp), various game guides, IGN's own articles on the topic, etc. etc. --Eldarone 03:14, 15 November 2007 (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.