Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grand Theft Auto wanted star system


 * 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 REDIRECT to Grand Theft Auto. Just wanted to note that "newbie shock" isn't a good reason to redirect: that discussion belong on WP:XD or somewhere else, but it doesn't have any bearing on an AfD, imo. -Splash talk 00:40, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Grand Theft Auto wanted star system
Unencyclopedic -- too much unnecessary detail. If the consensus is that the article should be kept, info could be merged into Grand Theft Auto (series). howcheng  [ t &#149; c &#149; w &#149;  e  ]
 * Delete Falls under 'wikipedia is not a how to', belongs at wikibooks if anywhere. --InShaneee 23:10, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete and Redirect to Grand Theft Auto article per recommendation. Jtmichcock 23:58, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Grand Theft Auto. This is too detailed for its own article. Mo0 [ talk ] 23:59, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - I agree with the nomination that it shouldn't be a seperate article but this gameplaying feature plays a huge part on the series. --J. Nguyen 00:45, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * KEEP!!! Come on guys! I worked hard on this article!  Yes, I do see a point in merging it with the Grand Theft Auto game articles themselves, but then it would have to be put onto every one and here it would be more central.  So just fix it up and provide links to this article from other GTA related articles.
 * Comment by User:NicAgent. --InShaneee 01:23, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect. You could save the information and post it to a fan site. Durova 01:47, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, important aspect of gameplay in the series, helps users to understand the games. Kappa 02:12, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * So where exactly do you draw the line on what shouldn't be included in a game? --InShaneee 02:25, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Somewhere below important aspects of gameplay which help users to understand the game. Kappa 02:33, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Walkthroughs are the penultimate example of helping someone understand every aspect of a game. Do you think they should stay? --InShaneee 03:17, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Grand Theft Auto series. The proper place for this sort of detail is Wikibooks, not Wikipedia; Wikipedia offers encyclopedic overview of video games, not specific mechanical details. (It doesn't help that this article is heavily biased in emphasis on the newer GTA games.) - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 10:46, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is a description of events that are postulated to possibly occur in a videogame: there is absolutely no reason I can see for having a separate page for this. It is entirely unreferenced, violates WP:NOR, and is unencyclopedic. encephalon  13:44, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. I think a redirect is an unideal choice here because anyone looking for information on this GTA game is unlikely to search for GTAWSS. encephalon  13:47, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * It discourages recreation, and also catches anyone who searches for "Grand Theft Auto star" or "Grand Theft Auto wanted star". - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 13:51, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * That's an interesting point, AMIB; I remember you've raised it before. I suppose I see those reasons as additional benefits to keeping a redirect that is clearly meritorious; but I do not think we should keep even poor redirects essentially only because there was once a page there. But it's an interesting point, yes. encephalon  13:57, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * It also reduces "deletion shock" for newbies, when their work is deleted with no clear sign of what happened to it, and also preserves the history in the off chance we want to transwiki or merge it later. (Yeah, I know about undeletion, but anyone can look at the history of a redirect.) Redirects pose vanishingly little database impact and take up so little disk space as to be a rounding error. There are lots of good reasons to use redirects any time there's a reasonable redirect target. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 14:05, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect per A Man in Black. Youngamerican 16:44, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect --Mateusc 23:29, 15 November 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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.