Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mario Super Sluggers Collectible Cards


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 11:01, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Mario Super Sluggers Collectible Cards

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

This is simply an online game to promote the newest Mario baseball video game. This is an unacceptable split off of Mario Super Sluggers for various reasons. The article is simply a game guide at best, and any relevant content can be fit in a few paragraphs at best on the main article. I've tried explaining this to the editors involved: but they refuse to listen. I've tried redirecting this to the main article, and it just gets reverted. RobJ1981 (talk) 21:16, 10 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete places undue weight on a glorified ad campaign, which can and should be covered in prose within Mario Super Sluggers. The article is a guide in every sense, being nothing more than a list of URL card locations and instructions on how to unlock other materials - Wikipedia is not a guide. Someoneanother 21:50, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Trivial, unsourced information, undue weight. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 22:23, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. There is clearly no need to have an article for this. --  E.M.   talk  ●  contribs   23:27, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. We do not need articles for ad campaigns. - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:03, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * That's not necessarily true - see also Where's the beef?, for example. But I concur that there is no independent notability here. UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 17:56, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I believe the above poster, RobJ1981 is wrong. This information is valuable to hundreds if not thounds of children and adults around the world. He also stated Gamefaqs was not reliable, which I disagree with, people can say that Wikipedia is not reliable in the same manner. Once people who care post good and correct information, it is up to the user to consider if it is reliable or not. This article is not a game guide, it is a resource to a collectible card game from Mario Super Sluggers. Not the/and/or video game, but something else entirely. My question is why does he care so much about this page? does he own it? does he need it? he should just lay off and find some others to harrase. Thank you, Daddio. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.139.185.90 (talk) 21:25, 10 September 2008 (UTC) — 69.139.185.90 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletions. MrKIA11 (talk) 00:43, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete while not necessarily advertising in itself, it certainly fails WP:NOT in many areas, including original research, WP:NOTWEBHOST, and WP:GAMEGUIDE. MuZemike (talk) 01:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * First, read the introduction on Wikipedia. And if you read WP:VG/S, which is a community consensus, GameFAQs is to only be used for release information, nothing else. Also please read WP:OWN and WP:V. Finally, you will be WP:CIVIL in these discussions and assume good faith. MuZemike (talk) 04:37, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. I think said it best, namely the WP:OR and WP:NOT bits. Doesn't seem like what this project is suited for, especially when there isn't significant discussion in independent reliable sources. Cirt (talk) 11:22, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete This should be covered with a section in the MSS article. Too bad this couldn't have been a simple redirect job without the need for AFD.  Pagra shtak  13:05, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. As I note above, we do have some articles on ad campaigns and promotions, but in each such case there is converage of the campaign itself, and the subject's notability is established independently from the product being advertised. That's not the case here, and I'm unclear on why this material cannot be included in the game's main article. UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 17:56, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. If the ad campaign gets the coverage required for notability an encyclopaedia article can be created then. Nuttah (talk) 07:55, 13 September 2008 (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.