Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Mortal Kombat arenas


 * 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  d elete. - Mailer Diablo 02:20, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

List of Mortal Kombat arenas

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Wikipedia is not a game guide, and besides that, this article is an in-universe repetition of plot and setting elements from the various Mortal Kombat game movie and book articles. As such, it is purely duplicative and has no encyclopedic content. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 01:55, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - NN, Cruft and a meandering waste of space. Merge any useful info into the actual game articles and then delete (If any useful information can be found!). Spawn Man (talk) 03:09, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Please see this suggestion. Sincerely, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 17:38, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: Per the above, especially WP:NOT and WP:FANCRUFT. - Rjd0060 (talk) 04:50, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Maxamegalon2000 06:06, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Please see this suggestion. Sincerely, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 17:38, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletions.   --Gavin Collins (talk) 12:02, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete entirely in-universe indiscriminate list of game cruft items. No encyclopedic analysis, no evidence of reliable secondary sources providing evidence of notability.  Sole reference is gamespot interview which fails to support the article where it needs supporting. Pete.Hurd (talk) 16:27, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Please see this suggestion. Sincerely, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 17:38, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I've looked at the link you provide (WP:IDONTLIKEIT). You seem to be suggesting my !vote is a a pro-forma "I don't like it" presented without valid rationale.  Yet I clearly presented rationales, for instance it's entirely "in-world" which makes it unencyclopedic, since there is no "use" or "meaning" to be gleaned from the article which applies to this world.  Further, the sole reference does not amount to the "extensive coverage" in reliable, secondary, sources.  Perhaps you would care to explain the point you are trying to make, because I've gazed deeply into the entrails you link to and find no valid referent. Pete.Hurd (talk) 21:19, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, Pete! I'm only referring to the use of the unencylopedic word "cruft."  I agree that the article should have more prose and more references, but that aspect falls under a "so fix it" rather than delete rationale, i.e. this kind of argument.  Best, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 21:30, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep as a discriminate list of verifiable items from one of the most notable game series in history. Best, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 17:38, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Please see this suggestion. Sincerely, --Chardish (talk) 17:46, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Just making good faith suggestions by referencing a popular essay that many others use in these discussions. Best, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 21:30, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Over and over again, to the point of being disruptive. Stop assuming that none of us have read what anyone else posted in this discussion, including what you already posted before. - Chardish (talk) 20:49, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, "indiscriminate gamecruft" has been copy and pasted to the point of disruption. We should not try to alienate our readership and volunteer editors.  Best, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 20:53, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * If that is your rationale then you are disrupting Wikipedia to make a point. - Chardish (talk) 07:46, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * No, that would mean that those copying and pasting "indiscriminate gamecruft" would be violating POINT. Regards, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 18:45, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Unless you have a legitimate argument rooted in policy to argue for a Keep on these articles, there is no point to continuing to post keep on all these crufty fan articles. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:10, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Let's see, he said "a discriminate" (meaning not indiscriminate) "list of verifiable items from one of the most notable game series in history." How is this argument any less "rooted in policy" than your unsubstantiated assertion of "indiscriminate gamecruft"? Perhaps if AfD were treated as an actual attempt to discuss with the goal of reaching consensus instead of just a forum for repeating one's personal opinions and interpretations of policies and making fun of anyone who disagrees with them, there would be a point to this. DHowell 00:00, 1 December 2007 (UTC)


 * And also see WP:ILIKEIT.--WaltCip (talk) 21:01, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is true that I do like the article, but I do also believe that it can and should be improved. Millions of people worldwide will be familiar with arenas from this majorly popular game and so it is worth keeping for historic purposes.  Sincerely, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 21:30, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Yes, Mortal Kombat games are notable, and so is Super Mario World. However, Wikipedia doesn't have a List of Super Mario Word worlds, or an article on the Donut Plains. •  Supā saru  13:58, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as indiscriminate gamecruft. - Chardish (talk) 17:44, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Please see this suggestion and this argument. Sincerely, -- Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 17:47, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Cruft isn't always an "I don't like it" argument, so stop acting like it is. I'm finding it very disruptive that you post that just about everytime someone mentions the word cruft. RobJ1981 (talk) 18:43, 27 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. Game guide content not suitable for Wikipedia. The game series is notable, but that doesn't make every aspect of it notable for inclusion on Wikipedia. RobJ1981 (talk) 18:43, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom - Notability is not inherited. Fails WP:NOT and WP:N. Highly indiscriminate since there are many arenas in Mortal Kombat and none of them assert their own level of notability (except for the pit fatality, but that's not relevant.--WaltCip (talk) 21:01, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:FICT. RMHED (talk) 21:30, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete almost no out-of-universe information, with nothing to establish notability. Does not meet the requirements of Notability (fiction).  Pagra shtak  15:45, 28 November 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.