Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Metal Gear (disambiguation)


 * 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 no consensus to delete, which defaults to keep. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:03, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Metal Gear (disambiguation)

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

This disambiguation page is uneccesary. Metal Gear, Metal Gear (series), and Metal Gear (weapon) all have disambiguation links to each other. — bse3 (talk • contribs • count • [ logs ]) 04:49, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related-related deletion discussions.   —Pixelface (talk) 05:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Perfectly logical argument for me. Delete. - Chardish (talk) 06:49, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - Digging a little deeper there are many more articles than just those 3. The disambiguation should stand as there is a Metal Gear Solid Movie, and other significant inclusions in the series such as Metal Gear Solid, and Metal Gear Acid. I've added them to the DAB page. AtaruMoroboshi (talk) 16:14, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note that the Solid and Acid entries you added shouldn't be part of this dab page as they are not known as solely "Metal Gear" (I guess). See MoS:DAB. I have therefore marked the page with disambig-cleanup. – sgeureka t•c 14:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I saw that. Since the revival of the Metal Gear series, the games have been referred to mainly as Metal Gear games, even if they are Solid or Acid designation. So, I think its debatable as to whether or not they should appear on the dab. Also, checking there is no disambig for Metal Gear Solid. AtaruMoroboshi (talk) 14:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

*Keep as expanded (and, as noted, it would have been acceptable before too). -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:11, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I still think it should be deleted. When one is looking for "Metal Gear", they don't mean "Metal Gear Solid". By going to Metal Gear (series), one can find links to all those articles. Metal Gear (series) acts as a better link to all these other pages than Metal Gear (disambiguation). Unless someone finds a page with the word "Metal Gear" that does not relate to this series in any way, there is no need to have a disambiguation page. It seems pointless to have a disambiguation for things that are all related. Maybe it would be better to have "Metal Gear" redirect to Meatal Gear (series) and rename the page for the original game to something like "Metal Gear (orginal game)" or "Metal Gear (first game)". — bse3 (talk • contribs • count • [ logs ]) 19:30, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note that bse3is the AFD nominator. AtaruMoroboshi (talk) 12:52, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and fix the articles mentioned in the nomination to point here, per MOS advice about dab pages. Percy Snoodle (talk) 11:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and fix per User:Percy Snoodle. If there were only the 3 pages mentioned in the nom then it would be a toss-up, but the dab page has 8 blue links at present, and that's too many to hatnote. This is exactly why dab pages are used. User:bse3 is clearly familiar with the content and knows how to navigate directly, but we shouldn't assume the same for other users. --AndrewHowse (talk) 13:47, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Neutral As a regular dab editor, I have no expressed preference whether to use two hatnotes or have a separate dab page. I am unfamiliar with the franchise, but it seems that per MoS:DAB most of the current entries shouldn't be on the dab page but rather Metal Gear (series) (where they are already listed). So I see the dab page as a little redundant but not explicitely deletion-worthy. – sgeureka t•c 14:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per MOS:DAB that states that a dab page with as few as two entries, though not necessary, is acceptable. Gwguffey (talk) 14:18, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * keep - if in doubt, always keep. Abtract (talk) 23:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. No article links to the page, and the existing hatnotes on the "main" pages handle the disambiguation well enough.  No reader will be served by the disambiguation page in the current arrangement, nor underserved by its absence. -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:23, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment As you probably already saw from the edit history, many of those links were added this week. I'll try to go and add links to the disambig for other pages. However, I believe "No reader will be served by the disambiguation page in the current arrangement" is not sufficient criteria for deletion. AtaruMoroboshi (talk) 12:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * A disambiguation page that serves no reader should be deleted; if not, what is sufficient for disambiguation page deletion? They aren't articles to be checked for notability, etc.  I'm also not sure to which pages you're proposing to add links to the disambiguation page -- unless it's to replace the current hatnotes on the base name, series, and weapon.  If there is consensus to use a dab page instead of the "two other uses" type hatnote, that'd be a reason to keep the dab page. -- JHunterJ (talk) 00:36, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I still cannot stress Delete enough. A good comparison to this is Mario (disambiguation). This page is necessary because "Mario" can refer to things other than the video game, such as Mario (singer) and Mario (tenor). It does not list all the Mario games but instead leads to the page for Mario and Mario (series). To find the pages for all other Mario related things one would go to Mario (series) which has Template:Mario series at the bottom for easy navigation. The pages Metal Gear, Metal Gear (series), and Metal Gear (weapon) all have Template:Metal Gear at the bottom to serve the same purpose, making Metal Gear (disambiguation) useless. — bse3 (talk • contribs • count • [ logs ]) 01:03, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The question is whether people searching for the term "metal gear" want to end up on the article for the 1987 videogame or somewhere else. --Pixelface (talk) 14:19, 13 March 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.