Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Nintendo Revolution games

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Keep. Hedley 23:55, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

List of Nintendo Revolution games
Far too much crystal ball and reliance on rumors and speculation. "Revolution" is a code name not the actual name of the system. See Nintendo Revolution for an actual list of games that have been aknowledged or confirmed by Nintendo. This page is no where near ready and far too soon for a system that won't be released till 2006. K1Bond007 04:39, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. The press is using the name Nintendo Revolution consistently, and once the actual name of the system is known, we can just move it to the correct name.  Additionally, the page is only three days old, and vandals have been blanking the page.  Almafeta 07:27, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. It seems to me that a more appropriate place to put a list of rumored games at this early stage of development would be the main Nintendo Revolution article. Once the system is released, this article can be recreated. Kairos 09:12, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per Kairos. --TheMidnighters 14:04, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:NOT a crystal ball. -Splash 14:22, 15 July 2005 (UTC) Weak keep per dicussion on talk page. -Splash 22:47, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep We just have to make sure that only confermed games are put on the list. And what is the point of deleting an article that is just going to be recreated later? Joizashmo 16:18, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. --Carnildo 20:41, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete As previously noted, crystalballing.  Additionally, unencyclopedic list topic. The Literate Engineer 20:47, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per Kairos, this does not need to be split out yet. Dcarrano 23:51, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Thunderbrand 23:58, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Is it better now, that I've altered it to only feature confirmed games? -- A Link to the Past 00:23, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. It'll just be remade as soon as more info comes out, and it's nice to have a list of confirmed games. Nifboy 01:09, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Also, note that in regards to WarioWare and Camelot RPG, the two games were confirmed by NGCFrance, but did not have an announcement from Nintendo or Camelot. Delete them if you want, or put a notice that it is confirmed by NGCFrance, who did not list their sources on the matter. -- A Link to the Past 01:34, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Speculation - Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. JamesBurns 04:26, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Who's speculating? Nintendo? -- A Link to the Past 04:27, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * Also, I vote Strong Keep. For one, there is NO SPECULATION IN THE ARTICLE. Hell, there are links on Nintendo Revolution's page confirming each of the games. For another, this article will be expanded upon, so why is it causing problem? If it were a larger list, it wouldn't be a problem. It's not an ideal VfD nomination, because it will, no doubt, be a noteworthy article. It wastes no bandwith because it is small, and when it begins to waste bandwith, it will be notable enough to warrant a place. There is no Crystal Ball, Hocus Pocus magic involved in this list; only the words from the horses' mouths. -- A Link to the Past 04:50, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * Daikatana was confirmed as coming out in late 1997. Duke Nukem Forever was planned for release in 1998.  Half-Life 2 was scheduled for September of 2003.  The Phantom game system was scheduled for Christmas of 2004, then March of 2005.  --Carnildo 06:10, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
 * So, what you're telling me then is if we have this article with these games confirmed and at an early development, they will forever be there. Wikipedia is written on the internet, not stone tablets. We don't need to wait until it becomes impossible for the games to be cancelled. As of now, there's little reason to believe they'll be cancelled, and even then, if they're cancelled, change it. -- A Link to the Past 06:16, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * And yet this page still breaks the rule of WP:NOT. Most of the games listed are all "Untitled" and all of them are already listed at Nintendo Revolution. There is no point to this article. It should be deleted and recreated at a later time (in the correct name) when a proper list can actually be made. Please read WP:NOT, it is policy. K1Bond007 06:35, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * That is what they are. If you say they don't exist, then you'd be a liar. They are in development, that is not even arguable. And if this applies to WP:NOT, then Twilight Princess does. AND, I fail to see the reasoning in deleting a harmless article that will return at a later date. There is no speculation on if these games exist, since they are confirmed by people with the authority to confirm it, so they are Revolution games. We should assume they're coming, like we do with Twilight Princess, Super Mario Strikers and Katamari Damacy DS. -- A Link to the Past 06:44, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * And on another note, if you're arguing this, then I dare you to go to each and every page for an unreleased game (like, Twilight Princess), and delete any mention of a release date. You're assuming that these games won't come out just because we haven't seen pictures, so logically, you must assume that game won't come out, right? -- A Link to the Past 06:19, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep confirmed info lots of issues | leave me a message 06:49, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. This list does not suggest that it is. Ambi 07:51, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Ordinarily, I'm soft on "crystal ball" policy, and support keeping items that will soon be valid topics; here, though, "Revolution" isn't even the name of the system. The title is inappropriate, and the verified content exists at the system's parent article. Xoloz 15:24, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep: All items mentioned here have been externally confirmed. Nintendo is notoriously tight-lipped about their projects, we need to wait a bit longer.~ Dread Lord C y b e r S k u l l &#9998;&#9760; 10:35, 2005 July 17 (UTC)
 * Keep Usefull. Can be moved to correct name when it comes out. Is anything being hurt by having this article there? (sorry forgot to login) Ravedave 20:17, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Upon further consideration, I'm changing my vote to Keep. While I would greatly prefer that game lists of this type distinguished between released games and upcoming games, that it not how they work. Given that, my biggest problem with the list is probably that the games on it don't actually have titles, and it seems to me like that's not a very good reason to vote to delete. Kairos 20:36, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment I will concede that this may no longer be crystalballing; however, I still believe that this is an unencyclopedic topic and does not even constitute an article. My vote remains to delete.  The Literate Engineer 00:59, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

And now, it turns out that there are five more games announced. This article is no longer speculation, if it ever was. -- A Link to the Past 21:48, July 21, 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.