Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Civilization (board game)


 * 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 SNOW Merge and redirect to Civilization (board game), with no prejudice against creating a list article as well. -- JHunterJ (talk) 17:13, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Civilization (board game)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This disambiguation page is in violation of WP:INCOMPDAB. All entries can be listed at the parent disambiguation page, Civilization (disambiguation) without issue. -- Tavix ( talk ) 00:07, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. -- Tavix  ( talk ) 00:07, 8 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect to Civilization (disambiguation). The dab page is tiny and this situation is not remotely complex enough to warrant needing a separate article. &mdash;Xezbeth (talk) 05:45, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Civilization (disambiguation) per WP:INCDAB. This case is exactly analogous to the example there.  We should also delete the anomalous redirect  which was created automatically when  fixed some bad links. Certes (talk) 11:50, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Civilization (disambiguation). This is textbook example of WP:INCDAB. older ≠ wiser 12:15, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Civilization (disambiguation): clear cut WP:INCDAB. Eddie891 Talk Work 15:40, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect - pile-on !vote; based on the talk page discussion this probably shouldn't be SNOW closed until comments. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 04:17, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree with the suggestion that hatnotes on the boardgames can point to Civilization (disambiguation), which serves the same purpose as this page. No content is deleted, it is simply merged per WP:INCDAB. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 18:27, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment, since this is the first attempt at bringing the matter up for discussion anywhere: I created the page because I needed a landing for the hat notes of the involved board game articles. Three different editors just wrecked that work with zero warning, zero discussion and zero feedback. It's not that I oppose the removal of this page per se, it's that none of the three efforts took the care to make everything work. Yes, all three efforts so far has created various messes, feel free to browse page histories! Since none of them have taken the time to engage, reverting with the edit comment "please discuss on talk" was the quick and painless way of ensuring a clean state without broken stuff. If anyone wondered why their edits were discarded, all they needed to do is ask. Nobody did - I just assume they all thought I was hung up about policy. I wasn't. That said, please do note that many of you seem to believe the INCDAB policy page mandates the deletion of this article. Read it again, and you'll see that DOUBLEDAB is not prohibited, and that policy does not clearly stipulate when doubledab is to be used or not. Maybe it should be saying that... but it really does not. Nevertheless, I do see where this AfD is going.
 * Comment, cont'd: Anyway, I applaud this, the first effort, to actually engage in discussion. If you must delete the page, feel free to do so, but please make sure you don't leave stuff hanging (from related article pages). Best regards CapnZapp (talk) 10:02, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I think everyone wants to put the content and wikilinks of related pages into a consistent state. The reason this didn't happen is that editors with different views were pulling in opposing directions, making edits which were each reasonable in isolation but conflicted when viewed as a group.  Once we have a consensus on which way to go, we can soon get there together.  Can we agree the best target for the hatnotes?  I propose Civilization (disambiguation) (which will automatically appear styled as Civilization (disambiguation) § Games) as that's the actual destination and will keep such links off the reports of ambiguous links to be fixed. Certes (talk) 12:54, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Why should there even be hatnotes? "Civilization (2010 board game)" is not ambiguous. &mdash;Xezbeth (talk) 18:08, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The full name of the game is "Sid Meier's Civilization: The Board Game", which redirects there (along with a few variants). That title specifically refers to just that game, although it is ambiguous enough to refer to most of the boardgames generally. -- Tavix ( talk ) 18:23, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * A good point. Most of the hatnotes can be removed per WP:NAMB.  Advanced Civilization is the only ambiguous title; it currently has no hatnote and its alternative meaning isn't a board game.   redirects to Civilization (2002 board game) and  redirects to Civilization (2010 board game).  Those titles may justify redirect hatnotes, or we may even feel that (despite WP:SMALLDIFFS) those titles are ambiguous enough to retarget them directly to the dab section.  Certes (talk) 18:33, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The hat notes should certainly stay: The difference between Sid Meier's Civilization: The Boardgame and Sid Meier's Civilization: The Board Game is a mere space; nuff said. And since we have three articles named Civilization (YY board game), it is easy to see how a reader got the wrong one and would be helped by links to the others. (Via a single link to disambiguation, of course; not by some incomplete listing right in the hat note). Then it's the matter of actually formatting the Civilization (board game) (disambiguation) article (or section if you must). Please see talk. (Sigh - I really wish people weren't so talk page averse...) Okay - here goes: In short, what to link - the real title or the Wikipedia article title? And it looks strange to have A New Dawn as the sole exception; very jarring. Please don't intermix board and video games in a single jumbled "Games" section. It becomes one long list of hypnotic "Civilization" entries with only slight variance in wording that are directly reader hostile. Did I miss one? I probably did. All in all, I suggest this process (the AfD) is put on hold or whatever while we have a proper holistic discussion on an actual goddamn talk page (anywhere but here - when the discussion closes, this space gets shut down with no further possibility to discuss), copying this stuff now that we finally have started talking. Thanks. CapnZapp (talk) 21:37, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect. This is getting into WP:SNOW territory. —  python coder    (talk &#124; contribs) 22:35, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * If all of these are related, why not just move this to List of Civilization games and de-disambiguate altogether? bd2412  T 02:32, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * It certainly could be a list or set index. If so then I'd go for List of Civilization board games, to disambiguate from Civilization (series) which covers the video games. Certes (talk) 13:11, 11 December 2018 (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.