Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bomberman Collection Vol.2


 * 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 List of Bomberman video games.  MBisanz  talk 03:55, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Bomberman Collection Vol.2

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No assertion of Notability, contains no independent links or sources. ReformedArsenal (talk) 02:26, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - Google News archives found one result here (Japanese) so additional results may be Japanese, considering Hudson Soft is based in Tokyo. I'm willing to reconsider my vote if Japanese sources are found. SwisterTwister   talk  02:38, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * That source is for Vol.1, not Vol.2. --Odie5533 (talk) 01:27, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Well technically it mentions Vol.2, so it could potentially be used, but the coverage isn't substantial so it doesn't help to show notability. -Thibbs (talk) 15:06, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 12:57, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:57, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:57, 6 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete, unless more Japanese sources are found. Buggie111 (talk) 21:35, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. The big thing about this is that the article isn't really a game, but a specific packaging of several of the games into one set. Sometimes, very rarely a compilation set of some kind or another (music, literary, games, etc) will achieve notability standards and merit an article of their own. This particular set does not seem to meet those guidelines and I notice that even the fan wikis specifically for Bomberman seem to lack any real coverage or material for this download only pack. If some Japanese sources can be found then I'm willing to change my vote, but I'm kind of doubting that any would exist that would be specifically about this particular pack rather than any of the individual games or series as a whole.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 05:48, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not seeing any third-party sources or coverage to indicate notability. The article is a borderline "Speedy Delete" as it stands. --DAJF (talk) 10:28, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I tried CSD first, and it got denied because there was content... ReformedArsenal (talk) 12:25, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Whatever is done with this article should also apply to Bomberman Collection Vol.1 which has the exact same amount of content. Another suggestion could be to Redirect both articles to List of Bomberman video games.--174.93.171.10 (talk) 23:12, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Except that Bomberman Collection Vol.1 shows RS coverage in PC Gamer (Issue 112, Vol.10 No.7, July 2003), ) as well (in the PC Gamer Reference Library). A single source doesn't argue for keep, but it's at least an argument for merge/redirect. I'd suggest merge/redirect for both of them to List of Bomberman video games. -Thibbs (talk) 18:20, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * There's also coverage in Computer Games Magazine #152 (here). There may be enough to warrant a stand-alone article here, although the current state of the article is a joke. I'm still !voting merge/redirect but no prejudice against a later split. -Thibbs (talk) 18:27, 10 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete both. Compilations of notable video games are not notable unless they themselves have received significant coverage. A mention in the List of Bomberman video games should be enough. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:00, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirect both to List of Bomberman video games. Delete both and remove links from Template:Bomberman series. I could not find WP:RS for the game compilations. I don't think the name makes a great redirect. Unless someone disagrees then I believe they should be deleted. --Odie5533 (talk) 15:50, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I haven't done a thorough search for coverage of Vol. 2, but there is certainly RS coverage of Vol. 1. See my post above. That said, I'm agreeable to a merge rather than a keep for now since there's so little content. -Thibbs (talk) 17:29, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * You mentioned it was really only a single source, but if you feel there could be a case made for keeping the other one, and this nominator has only nominated the one, then I would hold off on deleting the other until a proper discussion of it can be had. Regarding a merger, none of the information in the Vol.2 article is sourced. I added the game to the List of Bomberman video games. --Odie5533 (talk) 01:27, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Well I found another after that. The two sources I found for Bomberman Collection Vol.1 were PC Gamer #112 and Computer Games Magazine #152. There may be more - I haven't looked except just briefly. If there's nothing to merge except the title of the article because none of the content is sourced (and it's clear that there's very little content anyway) then a redirect may as well be set up until someone has the gumption to expand the article with RSes (if indeed any exist). -Thibbs (talk) 04:24, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * And to add to this, the sources I've found for Vol.1 tend to be reviews and I haven't seem much development info which is a requirement for remakes per VG/MOS. So if the titles are already included in "List of Bomberman video games" then redirect sounds best to me for now. -Thibbs (talk) 15:22, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Upon reconsidering, I think a redirect would be most appropriate in this case. If anyone wanted to link to the compilations, perhaps in the Super Bomberman article, then it would be useful to have the redirect. This would also allow Bomberman series to remain unchanged. --Odie5533 (talk) 20:07, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Question - Wouldn't this be useful as a disambiguation page? - 149.241.168.65 (talk) 13:51, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "Bomberman Collection" might be a good disambiguation page if there were articles for "Bomberman Collection Vol.1", "Bomberman Collection Vol.2", and maybe "Hudson Best Collection Vol. 1 - Bomberman Collection". But just the term "Bomberman Collection Vol.2" (which is the topic of this AfD) is so specific that as far as I know it can only mean one thing. So I don't think a disambiguation page would help. A redirect, on the other hand, would be useful I think. -Thibbs (talk) 15:01, 12 November 2012 (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.