Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dishonored (series)


 * 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. North America1000 18:19, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Dishonored (series)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Seeing as my redirect was reverted I'm AfDing this. A video game series article for a single video game is completely redundant. It introduces no new information whatsoever and is currently pointless. The1337gamer (talk) 16:48, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. The1337gamer (talk) 16:57, 27 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. All coverage of the "Dishonored series" in a video game reliable sources custom Google search is really about one of the two games and should be covered in the respective article. Series articles aren't necessary until reliable, secondary sources start to discuss the series as its own entity apart from the games themselves. Send the navbox with it. – czar   17:04, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nominator. Someone should send the template to TFD too. -- ferret (talk) 17:05, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per czar's points. --Rubbish computer 17:19, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Was going to suggest a merge to Arkane's page but there's really nothing to merge. And a 2 game "series" is not a series. --M ASEM (t) 15:41, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:33, 2 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete as this would've also been best to redirect to one of the production company and as my searches found nothing better, there's no better article here. SwisterTwister   talk  06:58, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and all of the above arguments.  Onel 5969  TT me 13:14, 5 October 2015 (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.