Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/D'ni items


 * 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. PeaceNT 02:06, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

D&

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article has no real-world significance. Belongs in a game guide, not an encyclopedia. Calliopejen1 00:31, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Lots of precedent for game data in wikipedia, wikiproject:final fantasy for one.  I know WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is specifically cited as an argument NOT to use in these discussions, but "other stuff" can often be an indicator of a community consensus.  There's enough material on the Myst franchise, and it is extensive enough and actively enough maintained, that I see evidence of a community consensus that this is notable.  (The D'ni article seems too big to fold this back into, as well; otherwise I'd totally think it was merge-worthy.) Deltopia 01:29, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: Per nom. This doesn't belong in an encyclopedia.  No real encyclopedic context.  - Rjd0060 01:31, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, game guidy. SolidPlaid 01:38, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete A bit on the POV side. Who is to really say what is interesting and/or unusual?  Personally, I'd find the texturing and modeling more interesting than the items.  ARended Winter 02:04, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete "Item" is too general a criterion for inclusion. Ichormosquito 08:32, 9 October 2007 (UTC)  Weak keep/Rename to "List of Myst items" Is there any difference between this and List of Warcraft items?  Yeah, yeah, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS; but WP:FICT necessitates lists like this.  According to WP:FICT, we can't have an article for each item; but we shouldn't suffer a loss of information when the Myst franchise is so notable, either.  Wikipedia is not paper.  The Myst franchise can sustain a few of these lists.  Ichormosquito 06:40, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete In paragraph format, but otherwise what we'd call an indiscriminate list--everything in a game without discrimination of importance. DGG (talk) 07:16, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Here are a couple of semi-active Myst Wikis we can add this information to if we decide to delete: Ichormosquito 07:53, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Useless game guide information. I'm also nominating List of Warcraft items for deletion so it can't be used as an "example" in the future.--SeizureDog 08:13, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I don't think we can throw out stuff just because it holds no real-world significance or doesn't fall under traditional encyclopedic topics -- we'd spend six weeks just deleting video game and anime articles if we adopted that guideline. I think most of the arguments here boil down to WP:IDONTLIKEIT, and (while I don't like Myst, either), it's obviating the real use and interest that these articles hold for a lot of users. Myst was covered by an enormous amount of verifiable, notable sources; it was a major pop culture phenomenon when it came out.  This page is extended coverage of the subject and I think it's relevant. Deltopia 14:55, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * And if you just scroll down a little further you'll see WP:NOTINHERITED.--SeizureDog 15:13, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * For the record, I'm a Myst/Uru junkie. Ichormosquito 17:38, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Six weeks or longer, the non-notable video game and anime articles will be purged eventually. SolidPlaid 21:57, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of science fiction & fantasy deletions --Gavin Collins 18:45, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete 'cos its non-notable, D'init? --Gavin Collins 18:45, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete gamecruft with lashings of POV - "unusual or interesting items". Percy Snoodle 15:56, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree it is strongly PoV, and outside of Myst, details to this level are not appropriate. If there is a Myst wiki, the individual entries might make sense, with a category to link them, but on Wikipedia, I don't think its appropriate. Turlo Lomon 10:56, 12 October 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.