Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Game classification


 * 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  k eep. - Mailer Diablo 07:10, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Game classification

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This appears to be an unencyclopedic arbitrary list of game classifications. I thought I'd start an afd debate to see what people thought. Jules1975 16:55, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - unsourced, original research. Walton monarchist89 17:26, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as original research. -FisherQueen (Talk) 18:27, 8 February 2007 (UTC)


 * It's verifiable, not original research, and, as can be seen (see Hopper+Bell and Vossen in particular), has a lot of scope for further expansion. Keep. Uncle G 15:59, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached  Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks,


 * Keep References added by Uncle G, though still reads like WP:OR and article could be improved by explaining who Werner and Alomond etc are, and add an intro piece explaining why games are or need to be classified. Khu  kri  - 09:53, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep because of the good work done by Uncle G once again. Mathmo Talk 15:55, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per the excellent improvements made by Uncle G. Thanks, Black Falcon 20:44, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep since there is no longer an issue with original research. Could use some more work though. --Rambutaan 06:13, 15 February 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.