Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Node (computer gaming)


 * 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.  kur  ykh   01:29, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Node (computer gaming)

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

I can't find any reliable sources that show notability. Schuy m 1 ( talk ) 01:14, 4 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletions. MrKIA11 (talk) 01:25, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, given that the first game named in the article, Myst, does not use the word "node" anywhere in it at all. A definition looking for a neologism, which makes it WP:OR. Nifboy (talk) 01:47, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment The mention of Myst might have been a mistake. But I know Beyond Zork did use the term "node" in this sense. Squidfryerchef (talk) 05:13, 7 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment: Interestingly, I vaguely remember a book about game design discussing this concept, but I don't remember much of it. I think someone familiar with the field should take a look at this. A quick Google Books search returns multiple reliable sources from books discussing game design that mention nodes, although the topic discussed is different from what is discussed in the article.
 * Delete — cannot find any sources establishing notability of what seems to be nothing more than a neologism. MuZemike  ( talk ) 18:32, 4 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete I have to agree that notability is seriously lacking considering the context of the article. Javier  MC  22:17, 4 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. I've definitely seen "node" specifically used in the context of text-adventure games, the best case I can remember is Beyond Zork, which had a scrolling schematic of the nodes you travelled across.  Basically just like a node in computer science, a node in an adventure game is a room/zone/dungeon/etc that might have doors to only a few other rooms, which connect to other rooms, and the entire game board can be drawn up as a node structure (and was likely represented that way in the software).  Try Google web/books/Scholar/etc for "node" and "Zork" (or other adventure games), and sources should be available. Squidfryerchef (talk) 03:21, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * If I did that, the sources would be about the games and trivial mentions about nodes. Schuy m 1  ( talk ) 03:34, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily. You could have an article about nodes that gave specific names as examples.  The reason for including games in the search is so you don't get a million articles about data structures. Squidfryerchef (talk) 04:46, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * How would that show WP:NOTABILITY? Schuy m 1  ( talk ) 05:35, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I did a Google News search for the title and I found nothing. Schuy m 1  ( talk ) 03:38, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * And what I mean by trivial mentions, is it will just describe the room, zone, dungeon, whatever. Schuy m 1  ( talk ) 03:40, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * So it would not pass WP:NOTABILITY because it would not count as significant coverage in reliable sources. Schuy m 1  ( talk ) 03:42, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * If you are so concerned about the article, why don't you search for reliable sources that show notability in the remainder of this AFD? Schuy m 1  ( talk ) 03:45, 7 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Wait a moment. A Google News search is unlikely to turn up concepts or techniques used in computer games. A textbook on game design would be more proper. Rilak (talk) 04:30, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * So why don't you a find a game book to use as a source in the remainder of this AFD? Schuy m 1  ( talk ) 04:31, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Because the AFD would be over by the time I got the book. There's no requirement to produce the source during the few days the AFD goes on for.  Just to show that a source is likely to be found. Squidfryerchef (talk) 04:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Attempting to determine notability of a subject through an unrelated resource does not carry any weight. Its like searching for a paper about hamburgers in a library that contains papers on the subject of computers - pointless. Also, I was commenting, not recommending. Rilak (talk) 04:49, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Why should editors use a sources are out there keep? Schuy m 1  ( talk ) 05:24, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * If this AFD got closed per sources are out there, there is a possibility of the article sitting there forever without sources. Schuy m 1  ( talk ) 05:26, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. I've found a few items in Google Books that look promising.  While I can only get a few snippets of text, I don't think an interlibrary loan is going to get here before the AFD is over:
 * In The Inform Designer's Manual, by Graham Nelson and Gareth Rees, on p. 369, we have "Regions... or else are delineated by simple geography: cave games are especially prone to this, often having a node-like room with exits in eight cardinal directions. Thus "Zork II" has..."
 * In Hypertext: State of the Art by Ray McAleese and Catherine Green, on p. 138 we have "little passages of ADVENT and Zork and marketed by Infocom and other companies...where each scene is a node and your options are the allowable paths" and
 * In Atlas of Cyberspace by Martin Dodge, Rob Kitchin, on p. 181, we have "computer games "Zork" and "Adventure" of the mid-1970s ..... technique: link-node topological map, hand-drawn with pencil and paper."
 * So while these snippets I found over a couple minutes don't make an article, they do show it's more likely than not (the first book is a game designer's manual) that there really is a concept in game design called a node, and that it's associated with adventure games, it may have been more common in the 1980s, and may have its roots in text-based roleplaying games before computers. So we should give this article the benefit of the doubt and see which sources can be added. Squidfryerchef (talk) 05:11, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Those sources don't show notability, and I don't think that any articles should have the benefit of the doubt. This article has had a long enough time to be improved because it has existed since 2006. Schuy m 1  ( talk ) 05:32, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * If they are books used to teach game design at a university or equivalent level, and they have a significant material on the subject, then I see little reason to see how they can not be used to prove notability. Also, judging a topic's notability on the quality on the article's content is irrelevant. I have seen basic fundamental topics in computer science lacking content and quality. Doesn't mean they are any less notable than a heavily edited Pokemon article. Rilak (talk) 05:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - It's clear that "node" here is the same data structure element as a node in a Graph (data structure) (also called a vertex). The concept of node-based travel in a computer game seems better suited to be discussed somewhere in Adventure Game. --M ASEM  14:11, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * We could redirect to Level (video games) if there is no consensus to keep. It already has sections on maps and dungeons, and it wouldnt be too hard to condense the salvageable parts of the article plus the refs brought out in this AFD to create a paragraph discussing node-based gameplay.  A redirect will keep the history of this article for people doing a merge. Squidfryerchef (talk) 13:16, 8 October 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.