Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Virtues of Ultima


 * 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 Keep. —Wknight94 (talk) 21:03, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Virtues of Ultima
Delete due to lack of real-world notability and a lack of reliable third party sources about the subject. Wikipedia is not a game guide or a fan site for in-universe repetition. Coccyx Bloccyx (talk) 19:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Evidently notable.Colonel Warden (talk) 20:52, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The Google news search you reference returns many irrelevant matches. Were there any specific articles you had in mind?  Coccyx Bloccyx (talk) 20:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * There are several each from the NYT and CGW which seem adequate. Colonel Warden (talk) 21:07, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Would you care to cite specifics, or are you going to keep us guessing. Coccyx Bloccyx (talk) 21:08, 10 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak merge into the various Ultima articles. Xihr (talk) 02:44, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. I wouldn't call myself a fan of Ultima, but according to what I remember from some of the old games of the series, the virtue system is quite a central aspect of them. The virtues largely define what the games are all about and how the world and story are constructed, so I think the existence of this topic is justified. (However, I also agree that this article has a lot of problems with sourcing etc, but that's another issue.) Viznut (talk) 19:11, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. Someoneanother 14:19, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Something other than Delete. Although the article is a bit more detailed than I would care (Mandrake's pseudo-virtues seem... superfluous), much of its content should be kept and/or shuffled about to other pages, and that can be done using normal editorial techniques. Nifboy (talk) 20:24, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. The virtue system transcend the games themselves, in that it had a depth of development that was not necessary to the needs of the games, and so can be justified as a separate topic. Yik Lin Khoo (talk) 17:00, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per Colonel Warden. This is a notable topic with much coverage. --Pixelface (talk) 17:39, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. The Virtues of the Ultima games constitute a comprehensive value philosophy, and are extremely significant in computer games development. The nominator's claim of "lacking real-world notability" is uninformed, and the nomination smells of deletionism. Miqademus (talk) 01:12, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Excuse me? I see a lot of hand waving here, yet the article continues to lack any sort of reliable third party sources, nor have any been specifically mentioned in this discussion.  Rather than make baseless attacks I hope that you can provide such information otherwise I can guarantee we will be here again, with a second nomination, before you know it.  Coccyx Bloccyx (talk) 17:16, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I have to agree. I see a lot of assertions of notability, but very little proof. Pointing to a random Google search does not prove notability, Colonel Warden, and most of the articles linked only mention the system as a game feature. We need to see actual sources, edited into the article to prove notability. -- RoninBK T C 03:54, 15 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.