Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fourth Age Total War


 * 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 of the debate was SEMISPEEDY DELETE - if the author is blanking it and this debate is going the way it is, we might as well call it a day. -Splash talk 02:52, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Fourth Age Total War
Delete. The advertisement tag had been added to this article, and since then edits have done nothing to change that. On the contrary, the article now sounds more like a sales pitch. The page includes biographies of everyone who worked on the project as well as a giant FAQ section, and looks like a vanity article in general. Isopropyl 04:35, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as advert. Bobby1011 04:43, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. TheRingess 07:46, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable mod and advertising. &mdash;Wrathchild (talk) 14:14, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --Lockley 18:14, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. "And behold! ... it stank." - J.R.R. Tolkien. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 01:09, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Let me reiterate that: delete, really. Unreleased mods aren't notable enough for their own articles, by the way, unless they got really brutally cancelled or something. Took me a while to realize they hadn't really made a release, when the article managed to bury that in marketory talk and the links were malformatted too. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 01:41, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as spam, and delete all the images. Notable, existing, commercially released games don't get this many images; compare GoldenEye 007.  ergot 04:04, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment The author (User:Fatsheep) blanked the article. Though he's not the sole author if we're nitpicky (User:88.153.105.61 also touched this article, mostly to remove stuff though). And I don't think it satisfies speedy G7 criteria because this article was certainly not created accidentally. (Oh, accidentally created the article, then edited it 27 times just adding more advertising stuff? =) Though I'm sure this action counts as a strong argument that the article should nevertheless be deleted ASAP! --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 12:42, 25 February 2006 (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.