Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wheel of Fortune gameplay


 * 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. It's not clear that the nominator's expansion of the main article is a real merge that requires retention of the original for attribution purposes, but if somebody strongly feels that it is, it can be restored and redirected for that purpose.  Sandstein  06:01, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Wheel of Fortune gameplay

 * – ( View AfD View log )

WP:IINFO, far too detailed and indiscriminate. The retired elements such as Puzzler, Preview Puzzle, etc. cannot be reliably sourced in any way, and the info on the current elements is way too detailed (e.g. "If the host hits a non-cash space, such as Bankrupt or Lose a Turn, or a prize, the host re-spins the wheel, though usually this is edited out.") I have amended the main Wheel of Fortune article to contain only the most relevant elements of gameplay — I feel a basic outline does not violate WP:OR as it is akin to a plot summary, but this article is far too detailed. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 19:51, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete—Wheel of Fortune (U.S. game show) has been expanded to include necessary info from Wheel of Fortune gameplay and the child article is no longer needed.  Sottolacqua  (talk) 19:56, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - expansion of paragraph in parent article is clearer and more succinct than child article. JTRH (talk) 21:06, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:03, 17 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge While the up-merge done by the nominator is a step in the right direction, licensing requirements preclude deleting this article without non-trivial attribution efforts. Best just to redirect it to the main article to complete the merge simply. Jclemens (talk) 01:02, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Could you please explain what you mean by "licensing requirements" anmd "non-trivial attribution efforts"? Thanks. JTRH (talk) 02:24, 18 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete: I would agree that a short description of the game is fine in the main article (Which is already there) but this spin off article (no pun intended) is really not needed. Likewise if the result of this discussion is to delete than the associated non-free images (File:$5000 Space.jpg, File:Double Play from 1995.jpg, File:$10,000 Space from 2007.jpg) should also be deleted as they will be orphaned and unused. Soundvisions1 (talk) 17:32, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge - Historical information on old wedges is actually nice, and on Youtube I found a 1978 episode hosted by Chuck Woolery that includes the Star Bonus token. Someone picked it up and later got to try a special puzzle, just like the article says.  History on such special wedges is definitely welcome.  Also, if it's not already, the Double Play is worth mentioning in particular because it is today used in the Facebook version to double your spin.  CycloneGU (talk) 15:06, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
 * YouTube can't be used as a source, because the clips posted there are in violation of copyright. There are a few books that have been written about the show, and the information might be available in one of them (I don't have time to do the research), but there really isn't much else in the way of a verifiable source. JTRH (talk) 15:08, 22 March 2011 (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.