Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Navigation keys


 * 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   Redirect to Arrow keys (non-admin closure), duplicate information as found in the newly-merged Arrow keys. MuZemike (talk) 01:32, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Navigation keys

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


 * Delete Article had been created as an attempt to jump the gun and carry out a merge suggested at the open AfD Articles for deletion/WASD keys (2nd nomination) by C&P. Good faith attempts to speedy the article to allow for a proper move (assuming that this is the outcome of the AfD), retaining history, have been rebuffed by the creator of this article. Mayalld (talk) 15:08, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Abstain as creator of article. However, I would like to remind those coming to the AfD discussion of WP:BOLD and WP:IAR, and while I believe Mayalld is acting in good faith, I believe he's inadvertantly drifting uncomfortably close to WP:POINT. I am attempting to resolve a problem brought up in AfD, and I've never yet seen an argument that an article is required to stay in stasis during AfD. Haikupoet (talk) 15:10, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game related deletions. MrKIA11 (talk) 15:40, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment - This AFD is quite idiotic. Please withdraw this and just let the article be speedy'd if the other AFD closes as anything other than merge. User:Krator (t c) 18:25, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment What is idiotic is the need for the AFD. If the main AfD goes Delete, the article will be a G4 candidate. If the main AfD goes Keep the article will (at best) end up as a redirect. If the main AfD goes Merge, then the merge should be done properly by moving one of the existing articles, and merging the others in. In other words, no matter how the main AfD ends, this content isn't going to be kept. As such, the correct course would have been to allow the article to be speedied to make way for a potential move. Sadly, that speedy was objected to. If the creator of the article would stop jumping the gun, and let things run their course, this would resolve much more tidily. Mayalld (talk) 20:19, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It seems to me that the merged article is rather more valuable than the original articles were on their own anyway. And I reiterate -- WP:BOLD. I don't think it's jumping the gun to take it upon oneself to try to remedy the problem that brought the original articles up for AfD in the first place, and to say otherwise strikes me as extremely pedantic and rather counter to the Wikipedia spirit. Haikupoet (talk) 20:32, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I really don't see anything that justifies what is effectively a C&P move. Rushing to do this is not doing it any better. Mayalld (talk) 20:42, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep for right now and see what happens with WASD keys. If WASD keys gets merged, then we can G6 this one. MuZemike (talk) 18:26, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Better yet, we could just simply redirect to Arrow keys if the merge happens, which might be a good alternative to speedy deletion. MuZemike (talk) 18:38, 11 August 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.