Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doom 4


 * 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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was DELETE. &mdash; J I P | Talk 08:37, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Doom 4
Covers a single interview mentioning a hypothetical future game that is "[not] in production" and for which there are "[no] imminent plans of starting something". Fredrik | talk 10:39, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge with Doom. Extraordinary Machine 11:42, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Please, no. The same information was added to that article and I removed it. If anything, it could be added to an article about the Doom series. But I think even that is a bad idea since the interview does not reveal that a Doom 4 is in production or even planned, only that if it were, it wouldn't be developed by id Software. Fredrik | talk 11:59, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutral I'm torn betweek keep and merge on this one, and if merged, I'm not sure where. However, I would like to say that the quote referenced is completely correct, as I read that article too. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd  12:52, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, WP:NOT a crystal ball, and even if it were, the game won't probably ever be made. &mdash; J I P | Talk 14:40, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - too crystal ball, although there will most likely be a Doom 4 let's wait till such a game is actually announced, rather than build a stub around a magazine quote. 23skidoo 16:10, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete If there is no game and there are no plans, then there should be no article. Denni &#9775; 02:42, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. This entire article is based on one offhand comment by someone who by his own admission would not be involved in making the game. Not everything John Carmack says merits an article, particularly when it's just a statement of the obvious. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 08:52, 2 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.