Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of unofficial Risk versions


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 04:37, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

List of unofficial Risk versions

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Textbook WP:LINKFARM; a list of links to fan-made online versions of the game Risk. If any of these unofficial versions are significant, they should be mentioned - in context and with sources - in the Risk article. McGeddon (talk) 09:39, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Although the games look like fun this is not what WP is supposed to be for. No sources as well, and some of the games do not even say they are a version of Risk. The reader has to figure that out. Borock (talk) 13:05, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. As the nom says, a mere collection of external links. Deor (talk) 13:22, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:43, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:44, 31 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Do Not Delete The problem with Wikipedia is that it is so small-minded. It's trying to be a digital version of a 30-volume encyclopedia, and it can be so much more. The internet is vast and virtually unlimited. Wikipedia should adopt a structure to allow these kinds of articles and grow with how users want to use Wikipedia instead of forcing everyone to adapt to its ivory-tower mentality. This information is often not available anywhere else, and someone went through the trouble of compiling this and I personally am very grateful for it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ssybesma (talk • contribs) 00:41, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That's great. Anyway, delete because Wikipedia is not a primary source of information. Erpert (let's talk about it) 07:35, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Conditional delete I created this page, due to the mess on the original risk article's page. It kept all of those links away from the risk article, making everything tidy. I agree that there shouldn't be pages of links, but we surely cannot allow things to revert as to how they were before this article was made. Before this page becomes deleted, what do you intend to do, to ensure that the Risk article does not once again become swamped with links? --Île flottante (talk) 11:35, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Any such links added to Risk (game) can clearly be removed under multiple criteria of WP:ELNO (1, 4, 5, and 10, mainly). I therefore intend to suggest that you, or any other interested editor, remove them when they appear. Deor (talk) 12:00, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I am fairly sure that that was discussed on Risk's talk page. But consensus was held that the links improved the quality and function of the article.--Île flottante (talk) 15:46, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I see you discussing the matter principally with one other editor, with single comments by an editor who has only four WP edits in all (pro inclusion) and another editor (anti inclusion). I would hardly characterize that as any sort of consensus. Deor (talk) 16:08, 5 August 2010 (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.