Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of retired The Price Is Right pricing 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. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:37, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

List of retired The Price Is Right pricing games

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Duplication of Template:Retired Pricing Games. Article contains nothing more than a list of retired games. Sottolacqua (talk) 19:35, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per nominator. There is no need to have both. DivineAlpha (talk) 19:36, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. JuJube (talk) 22:01, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. I am only commenting here since I was notified of this AFD since I was the one who started this page after splitting the content from its corresponding main summary article. I have no opinion about the content itself, but I must state that the nominator's reason of "Duplication of Template:Retired Pricing Games" is an invalid one because it goes against the established guideline on Categories, lists, and navigation templates which clearly states, "Developers of these redundant systems [categories, lists, and navigation templates] should not compete against each other in a destructive manner, such as by nominating the work of their competitors to be deleted just because they overlap. Doing so may disrupt browsing by users who prefer the list system..." Zzyzx11 (talk) 03:02, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  —Sarilox (talk) 03:52, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Because I'd argue that the actual pricing game articles are not sufficiently notable on their own to really be their own articles, and thus can be merged to this to actually make a potentially Featured List. --M ASEM (t) 04:01, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Invalid nomination as Zzyzx points out. Gigs (talk) 19:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, per Zzyzx11. Per WP:CLN, categories, lists and navigational templates complement each other. Informational redundancy between them is not a reason for deletion. --Pixelface (talk) 19:48, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per Masem. The other retired pricing games could be mentioned here (or if any one is independently notable, mentioned here summary-style). Otherwise, lists and categories can coexist. MuZemike 16:58, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, per Zzyzx. Sabre Knight (talk) 20:07, 6 May 2009 (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.