Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Type Four


 * 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 of the debate was DELETE. Owen&times; &#9742;  18:06, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Type Four
Some Magic: The Gathering rules variant that someone came up with. There are many fan-created variants without any official sanctioning support from Wizards of the Coast. In the 11 years I've been playing this game I've become familiar with many well-known fan-made formats (which are mentioned in the "variants" section of Magic: The Gathering) but have never heard of this one. In any event, I don't think any unofficial rules variant for Magic is encyclopedic enough to warrant an article. Andrew Levine 00:51, 24 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Jkelly 03:10, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete non-sanctioned game variant that isn't that widespread. -- Grev 05:47, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nom.  Ban e  s  09:07, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete, there may be a reason for it to be here; it will never become sanctioned due to all-out wackiness but it may end up gaining popularity. Stifle 19:56, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per excellent nomination Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] (W) AfD? 00:16, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nice nomination. More nominations ought to be as well justified as this one. Klonimus 01:46, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Don't delete this article. It is well-written and informative. Type four is quite popular where I live, and deleting an article that presents potentially useful information seems rash. Also, I'm fairly certain that the article's author did not "come up with" this variant, as it is fairly widespread and has been around for quite some time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johankian (talk • contribs)
 * Delete as per nomination. MCB 05:33, 29 November 2005 (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.