Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Warcraft universe


 * 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 - hahnch e n 23:46, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Warcraft universe

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Reads like a plot summary and apparently is, which is what Wikipedia is not.

It has poor use of sources to reference its relevance to the real world. Chances are, readers who do not play the Warcraft games will have interest in reading this article due to its lack of significance to the real world, failing notability.

It also appears to be gamecruft, which ends up being an attractor to original research, furthering it from having a reliable source.

With the lack of notability to the real world, having only one source, and reading like a plot summary, this article has too many issues for it to stay. IAmSasori 22:50, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related-related deletions.   —IAmSasori 22:50, 8 November 2007 (UTC).
 * Delete - Unless there is some assertion that this can be talked about intelligently, AKA with creator commentaries, early designs, design evolution, it is just plot stuff taken from other articles. Judgesurreal777 22:59, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I think the article is salvageable, and we have articles about many fictional worlds; I dare say keep and cleanup. - Mike Rosoft 23:52, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - I'm fairly certain such information could be found per WP:FICT. Given how long the series has been running, as well as the numerous games featured in it, information likely could be found to make it similar to articles such as Ivalice or World of Final Fantasy VIII. Sephiroth BCR  ( Converse ) 01:44, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Hate Warcraft but it seems like an important topic. Article can easily be fixed.--Cartman005 02:21, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete as most of this article is comprised of game guide whose primary sources are not verifiable. The only real world section, Sources, is poorly sourced, and reads like a synthesis of published material. The term "Warcraft universe" has no reliable secondary sources to demonstrate the fiction outide of the Warcraft canon. --Gavin Collins 08:57, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - With reservations: The article looks more like the back of a box than an encyclopidia article, but I think it could be saved Figment26 09:06, 9 November 2007 (UTC) — Figment26 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Keep - I agree the article needs massive reworking.  But I think the subject is noteworthy enough to be included. Ccehlers 19:11, 9 November 2007 (UTC) — Ccehlers (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep there should be some sort of overview article on the Warcraft fictional universe. 132.205.99.122 20:23, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I have no problem with this one as long it's keeps up the real world context and dose not bury itself in pure fiction like the other Warcraft articles. Needs to be cleaned up but has the potential to be one of the only Warcraft articles worth keeping.Ridernyc 22:42, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - I see no reason for it's deletion. It's a good article.  It's also not very long, so cleanup would take less than an hour. --businessman332211 04:18, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Reasons given by nominator unsourced, original research, and fancruft are grounds for improvement, not deletion, and by nominator's own admission may not be relevant to this article. Nominator claims unnotable and yet provides no indication of what notability criteria they think this article fails.  Most importantly claim by nominator that topic is non-notable because non-fans would not read it shows a lack of understanding of notability.  I am not a fan of hip-hop or opera - but the 'fact' that only fans would read those articles does not mean those articles are non-notable.  Edward321 06:23, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I am rather anti deletionist in any case, but this article has real potential. Sure, it's not very good at the moment, but it's the stuff that featured articles can be made from. There is a lot that could be said which hasn't, despite a lot of stuff to be pruned. There is no reason to delete it. I also agree with the previous "keep" comments. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fuzzibloke (talk • contribs) 14:44, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - (quality of the current stage of editing aside) An article about the Warcraft Universe is entirely called for. If Wikipedia didn't have an article about the setting of the world's most popular video game, that would seem a bit odd.... -Harmil 23:10, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment There are no primary sources for Warcraft Universe per se, and this article stitches together books and gameguides into a synthesis of published material serving to advance the point of view that this fictional concept has a real-world existence, when in fact there is no such evidence. There are no verifiable sources to suport the concept, and no reliable secondary sources to demonstrate notability. What there is fails WP:NOT and WP:NOT. If this article is kept, I would be grateful if the closing admin give a summary of why, as I would like to raise this issue of WP guidelines being uninforceable at the village pump. --Gavin Collins 12:02, 13 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep per Edward321. Articles that need to be improved should be improved, not deleted. And there's no deadline for improvement. And just because someone is unfamiliar with something is not evidence that the subject isn't notable. Rray 16:14, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - a research synthesis is a perfectly acceptable source in academic research. With thousands of users and players and dozens of articles on the real world effects and applications of the WoW MMORPG, articles like this need to be improved, not deleted.  Improving requires work, deleting is not work. Web Warlock 16:23, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - What's wrong with it being about the game? When I looked at the article, I wanted to learn about the game.  Sure it needs some real world info, but what's wrong with telling us about a video game?  I'm sure the majority of people that come to it don't go there wanting to read nothing but quotes from Blizzard Officials and a tiny bit of info about the game.  What's it's relevance to the real world?  How about the fact that I've put tons of hours into all the games?  And a lot of my friends?  I say keep it, and just add the info you want.  If this article is deleted for being so much about story and little else, you should just go ahead and erase every video game article off of here and make sure they all turn into info on nothing about the developers and development of the game.  And in return I'll never, ever look to Wikipedia for video game info again. -- MaxDuo (talk) 18:35, 13 November 2007 (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.