Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Konami code games


 * 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 Keep – PeaceNT 11:55, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

List of Konami code games

 * - (View AfD) (View log)

properbly copied from some game cheating sites. wikipedia is not an instruction manual. KaiFei 18:59, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. The Konami Code is almost certainly the most famous example of a cheat code in videogame history, to the extent that it's been included in dozens (over thirty are listed on this page) of non-Konami games as the method to unlock a cheat code or easter egg.  A brief description of what the code does in the myriad games that respond to it seems only appropriate for something that's had such a broad impact on gaming.  Yes, the current article is lacking sources, but they shouldn't be hard too hard to find, assuming sites like IGN count as reliable sources for this subject.  Pinball22 20:06, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Pinball22. -Toptomcat 00:33, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Even if there's sources it doesn't change the fact that wikipedia is not an instruction manual. KaiFei 06:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep no reason for deletion (above comment completely ignores Pinball22's well-reasoned !vote). JuJube 06:21, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Also, this article provides no verifiable sources to establish notability.  This is either original research or it comes from a site that can be linked.  An editor saying that something is famous is not grounds for inclusion in Wikipedia, nor is saying that sources "shouldn't be hard to find".  Do you know what is grounds for inclusion?  Sources. Shaundakulbara 06:23, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Yes, of course sources are needed, and simply saying they're out there isn't enough.  I didn't have time to hunt for them right then...  has a lot of these listed.  More research is needed to find sources for games not listed there, and to verify what the code does for those games where detail isn't provided, of course.  Just needing sources isn't a reason for deletion in an article like this, though; it's a reason to tag the article for cleanup and work on it.  In my earlier comment I was trying to address the nominator's point, which is that Wikipedia is not an instruction manual -- to clarify, I don't think this violates that rule.  It's not trying to inform the reader on how to play the games, it's listing the games that use the code and its effect in those games as information about the history of the code. Pinball22 14:24, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. I created this page so I could remove these codes permanently from the Konami Code article. It has served its purpose very well so far.  If needed, I can site dozens of lists on the wiki less important than this one that we can delete first. --Measure 16:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That's a poor argument to use. Just because there are other "less important" lists, that doesn't establish this one's importance (in fact, it implies that -this- article is unimportant too).  --UsaSatsui 15:19, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * You are correct. The other part of my argument still stands, however.--Measure 16:37, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * On second thought, the less important lists do serve as a precedent to justify this list, particularly if those lists have survived an AfD. But Still, I phrased my argument wrong, so I struck through that bit. --Measure 16:51, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, but the list is cluttered and needs to be pared down a bit (and, of course, sourced). I would remove the descriptions of what the code does, plus the instances where the code is just referenced and not used (such as DDR and Goemon). --UsaSatsui 15:19, 26 January 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.