Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eureka 7 V.1: New Wave


 * 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   merge to Eureka Seven vol.1: New Wave. Scott Mac (Doc) 00:26, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Eureka 7 V.1: New Wave

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )


 * there is already another article about this and the name is more exact and has more information and more refs than this one. Also this has a bit of contradicting info to the other article.Bread Ninja (talk) 16:54, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment This sounds like a better candidate for a merge rather than a deletion. Which is the other article about this game?  Are you sure it's exactly the same game, or is it simply similarly-named?  --Malkinann (talk) 21:43, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. Malkinann (talk) 21:45, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. --Malkinann (talk) 21:45, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge Eureka 7 V.1: New Wave to Eureka Seven vol.1: New Wave. After seeing both articles even if the two games are diffrent they are similar and Eureka 7 V.1: New Wave remains an unreferenced stub. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:51, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge. I hesitate to recommend 'redirect' because these days, admins seem to interpret that as 'delete and redirect'. --Gwern (contribs) 21:59 23 January 2010 (GMT)
 * That is because this is an AfD (Articles for deletion), the article gets deleted and the deleted article's name turns into a redirect. It would not make much sense to keep an article and when someone looks up the name have the reader get redirected away from the kept article. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:07, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - I thought we weren't suppose to delete articles that are just being redirected, that way we keep the history of the redirected articles. --Sin Harvest (talk) 12:39, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Sin is right. Knowledgekid, you may wish to go read how are actually supposed to be done: Deletion process & Deletion policy.
 * Note the pages clearly assume that deletion & redirection are mutually exclusive; as an admin, when I closed AfDs, it never occurred to me that a consensus to redirect meant delete & redirect. If the content is so bad - libel, copyvio, etc. - that it needs to be expurgated even from the histories, then it could not have been a 'redirect' consensus but a speedy-delete or delete. --Gwern (contribs) 16:17 24 January 2010 (GMT)
 * Comment - On the note of what shouldn't be done but it is anyway, I'd add deleting content on the basis of "unclarified/unreliable sources" shortly before AfD-ing so that it looks stubified and without references. So yeah, the above happens, and there are worse things than it even. --Anime Addict AA (talk) 17:24, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge - These appear to be the same. Although to be honest, Knowledgekid, I've seen more problems with "merge" results than "redirect" results. Too often I see Step #2 of WP:SMERGE ignored and a de facto redirect resulting instead. At least with a "redirect" result you know what result to expect... -Thibbs (talk) 19:17, 26 January 2010 (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.