Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unreal (demo)


 * 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 Keep. Stifle 01:06, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Unreal (demo)
demo: un-notable Melaen 01:34, 11 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Note that Future Crew lists many demos, 3 of which have articles. Unreal also apparently won an award ("1st at Assembly 92").  I would say Merge all the Future Crew demo articles to one.  &mdash;Quarl (talk) 2006-01-11 01:55Z 
 * Keep but combine with Future Crew page. Mike 02:57, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge into Future Crew--MONGO 05:52, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge with Future Crew-- D  a  Gizza   Chat  10:15, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Per commets by Gargaj  D a  Gizza  Chat  (c) 21:58, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, don't merge any of the articles (especially not the Second Reality-one. You dont merge albums and singles to artists either). There's a lot of information I could add to the articles I just couldnt get around it. // Gargaj 15:57, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Also do note that this is only the second demo to have it's own article - Scream Tracker is a TOOL, just like Fast Tracker or Nuendo or Microsoft Word. // Gargaj 15:58, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Personal opinion: Being someone who's been doing demos for years, I find "demo: un-notable" highly offending. // Gargaj 16:13, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Melaen isn't saying that demos are not a notable thing, however this demo is not notable to the standards of Wikipedia. Don't be offended, merging it into the article for the Future Crew would preserve this article since it is not able to stand on its own merits. Mike 19:33, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Demo articles are a rarity and they're not flooding over Wikipedia either. This demo is a milestone (if not the starting point) for the PC demoscene - as the article (now) says, it's been a first time for many things to be done on the PC, thus IMHO it belongs here. // Gargaj 19:38, 11 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Edited the article into another shape. Anyone changed their minds? // Gargaj 16:42, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * keep please it seems notable no reason to erase it Yuckfoo 22:47, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is an awesome demo, and it is one of the most widely-distributed too. I think any demo that placed at Assembly is notable enough for an article. Rhobite 02:28, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, per Gargaj. It appears that this demo is widely identified as helping launch the demoscene on the IBM PC platform.  Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 07:15, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep separate and expand the article. Unreal and second reality have their own history and how they spun the demoscene into a mainstream phenomena. Demos are central to the history of the proliferation of 3D computing also, as worthy of individual articles as race horses, football players, and music singles. Metta Bubble 09:07, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, un-notable is an interesting judgment. This demo was one of or the starter for the demoscene on the PC platform. --Avatar-en 10:15, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep highly notable demo... hell half the techniques these guys were doing on 486 and Pentium level hardware has only just recently begun to be supported in modern graphics cards.  ALKIVAR &trade;Radioactivity symbol.png 16:41, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Unreal was certainly a notable milestone for the PC demoscene. This is not a random demo from a random group. It is an influential demo from the most influential group involved in the early PC demoscene. It is true that influential albums and even singles are afforded their own pages on Wikipedia.  I don't see why policy should be different for demoscene productions -- unless you want to argue that the demoscene is less worthy of historic documentation than the music industry, and that is shaky ground. Dilvie 01:48, 13 January 2006 (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.