Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of PlayStation 2 games compatible with PlayStation 3


 * 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 delete. Looks like unanimous consensus to delete the two pages in the original nomination. A bunch of additional pages were mentioned during the course of the discussion; please bring them to a new AfD if desired. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:42, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

List of PlayStation 2 games compatible with PlayStation 3

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Original research, and a violation of WP:NOT. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 22:18, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Also nominated:
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 02:33, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 02:33, 21 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete both Unlike the current approach that Sony does, where they have brought selected PS1/PS2/PS3 games forwards to the PS4 through emulation, the original PS3 was to have "generic" PS1 and PS2 compatibility - no extra software required. Yes, some games did not work well or at all, but that's where the original research from the nom comes in - there's no reliable sources for this information. We already summarize this generic compatibility elsewhere, so the lists aren't needed. --M ASEM (t) 02:55, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete both - I brought this up to the WikiProject months back and people generally agreed with my concerns, but we never got around to taking action. Sourcing for these 2 lists simply don't exist. Unlike most "List of video games for X platform", where websites report every time a game is announced, both of these lists are scenarios where the company just said "most games are compatible" at once, and then the exceptions and limitations were documented by editors themselves - WP:OR of course.  Sergecross73   msg me  03:17, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 16:56, 21 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete both WP:OR for sure, and further more, the topic for these two lists seems not to meet WP:N. There is no real reason that anyone would need to know what PlayStation 1 and or 2 games are compatible with the ps3 for research purposes, this just seems like a page to answer the question of "is my copy of __for the ps1 or ps2 playable on my ps3?". Wikipedia is not an answers site and this list is certainly not encyclopedic content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grapefruit17 (talk • contribs) 20:24, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment Should these similar lists be also nominated for deletion for the same reasons exposed by Grapefruit17?
 * List of Xbox games compatible with Xbox 360
 * List of Xbox games compatible with Xbox One
 * List of Xbox games with alternate display modes
 * List of backward compatible games for Xbox One--200.78.194.72 (talk) 22:47, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The 1st, 2nd, and 4th are fine - they are not OR - there are a purposely limited number of games, controlled by MS, that are compatible, and those games are frequently recognized in third-party sources. I'm not sure on the 3rd one but that should be a separate from AFD. --M ASEM (t) 23:12, 21 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment What about these?
 * List of PlayStation 2 games with alternate display modes
 * List of GameCube games with alternate display modes--200.78.194.72 (talk) 23:17, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, I believe any of these "alternate display modes" articles should be deleted as well, per WP:NOTMANUAL and my original !vote above. The sourcing is terrible and simply doesn't exist, so it's not a matter of cleanup... Sergecross73   msg me  13:48, 24 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment List of Xbox games compatible with Xbox 360 is WP:OR for everything except the list of games Microsoft has released. There is no sources for 50Hz PAL, 60Hz PAL, Widescreen and the list of issues with the emulated games on the list. Most of the issues noted on List of PlayStation 2 games compatible with PlayStation 3 and List of PlayStation games compatible with PlayStation 3 were copied directly from Sony's website when they maintained a database detailing 90% of emulation issues for the CECHA/B & CECHC/E models. There are some games that have their issues sourced via alternate means. So for the PS3 related articles the lists should be condensed down to just games with known & sourced issues. Its not fair to leave List of Xbox games compatible with Xbox 360 untouched while discussing the removal of List of PlayStation 2 games compatible with PlayStation 3 because of WP:OR  ♪♫Al  ucard   16♫♪  23:30, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The difference between the "PS1/PS2 playable on PS3" and these other lists, fundamentally, is that the former ones are just lists of all PS1 and PS2 games, with a few noted compatibility exceptions, simply because the feature was highly generic. That's indiscriminate information. The "Xbox 360 on Xbox One" list and the others, for example, require that some groups spend actual time and effort to get it to work for each game (it's not plug-and-pray (sic) as it was for PS1/PS2 on PS3), so there is a substantially limited set. And thus when a new set of backwards compatibility games emerges, it gets noticed and fanfare from external sources, so compiling the limited list makes sense. Now, I do fully agree some of the data columns are indiscriminate info ( 50/60 Hz PAL, for example) and should be removed, but the list of such games as a whole in these cases is fine since this is routinely tracked by sources. --M ASEM (t) 17:07, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree with you because of the nature of backwards compatibility on the PS3 there shouldn't be lists detailing every PS2 and PS1 game playable on PS3. However, these lists are nominated on the grounds of WP:OR and that is what is being discussed. My point is the PS1/PS2 games that have issues being played on a PS3 system came from Sony themselves when they maintained a database about every game on their website which is long gone now. Microsoft never listed how an Xbox title played differently on Xbox 360 they just had a general disclaimer. I'm saying that if the result comes down to these two articles in question being completely deleted then List of Xbox games compatible with Xbox 360 needs to be stripped of all unsourced content and needs to look more like List of Xbox games compatible with Xbox One because it has a similar problem of WP:OR that the two PlayStation articles up for deletion have. Now I would support a merge of the two and listing just the PS1 & PS2 games that have backwards compatibility issues with the PS3 if sources can be found and looks like one editor has been trying to find sources for some.  ♪♫Al ucard   16♫♪  04:10, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, List of Xbox games compatible with Xbox One is exemplary here, effectively just stating "it exists" and any notes (eg like the one case of a game also in the Rare Replay collection). Any further tech specs on these lists are likely wholly unnecessary - but that doesn't meant they should be deleted. But something like List of Xbox games with alternate display modes is both indiscriminate information (it's too "techie" for WP) and principally unsourced. --M ASEM (t) 06:43, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm slightly confused my main point was the "Notes" column List of Xbox games compatible with Xbox 360 which is breaking down the glitches when running Xbox software on Xbox 360 hardware. There are some games on List of PlayStation 2 games compatible with PlayStation 3 & List of PlayStation games compatible with PlayStation 3 that have these notes as well. If those are the items you are referring to as keeping then wouldn't a simple cleanup and merge of the two PlayStation articles with only the games that have those note suffice?  ♪♫Al ucard   16♫♪  08:46, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Documenting glitches or partial incompatibilities or video modes is original research and would require a viable source, and my experience is that this type of information is not documented in RSes. Notes about the availability of a game in a different format for the same platform despite also being on a backwards-compat list is far from that type of original research, that's "obvious" information so not a problem. --M ASEM (t) 20:21, 25 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment while I would support deletion of all the pages suggested by the IP editor, I'm not planning to add them to this nomination. I'd recommend one bulk AfD for all the "alternate display modes" pages. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 18:02, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete and also agree with power~enwiki, most of these lists are more shopping and technical guides than anything encyclopedic. ~ Dissident93  ( talk ) 19:37, 25 November 2017 (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.