Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wii System Software


 * 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, Little support for deletion, consensus is it does not violate WP:NOT, some support for a merge bbut no consensus here for such a step. Davewild (talk) 11:00, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Wii System Software

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This article seems to lean strongly towards: What_Wikipedia_is_not and What_Wikipedia_is_not. This is better suited for a gaming wiki, so a transwiki seems like a good idea. RobJ1981 (talk) 06:59, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, essentially a patch list. I'm going to invoke the spirit rather than the letter of WP:NOT and say that Wikipedia is not the place for this sort of thing.  Lankiveil (talk) 07:35, 23 December 2007 (UTC).
 * Merge – How about a merge to Wii software library as shown here.. Shoessss | Chat  13:14, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge per User:Shoessss. 99.230.152.143 (talk) 16:40, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. This does not violate WP:NOT or WP:NOT. It is not a patch list, because patches are minor updates to games that are insignificant.  The updates in this list is not insignificant.  The article does require some clean up, which I am going to do.  --Son (talk) 16:46, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. if merged into the main Wii article, it will create problems with the length of that article (and wikipedians seem to have a problem with long articles), and I can see no reason to delete the article, and strongly disagree with the argument behind the proposal.  Doktor  Wilhelm   16:57, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Trim to Merge - We don't keep track of minor version updates for software (per WP:IINFO); that's not to say this table cannot be trimmed down to keep version, date, and one or two significant changes that occurred in it, with appropriate links to offsite info for full patch details; at the present, it will be half a screen, and that could be included back in the main Wii article. The full details of the patch info are what make this table excessive. --M ASEM  17:07, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. I've done some work on the article; it is much more comparable to the equivalent XBOX and PS3 articles. --Son (talk) 17:22, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment, there's no reason to have a separate line for each "Added support for X" "Added support for Y", etc. The trimmed version, however, looks much better and, IMO would probably still fit better on the main Wii page, but no longer edges into indiscriminate information territory.--M ASEM  14:10, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - As a notable and important element of Wii software that should be kept independent of the main article. Would support Masem's trimming proposal, and the addition of some more references from different sources would be good, but AfD isn't cleanup. &mdash; Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 00:16, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep -- This list is definitely not insignificant. Sure we can trim down the list like Masem has said or merge it, but deleting it is going a bit far.  Eugene2x -talk 02:43, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - needs some tidyup work to make it the same standard as PlayStation 3 System Software but well worth keeping. --Oscarthecat (talk) 18:56, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep as it is a discriminate article with notable and verifiable information. Best, -- Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 01:20, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Note that WP:NOT says that verified information can still be indiscriminate and not belong here. Anyway, there seem to be two definitions of the term.  Yes, the information itself is very discriminate and selective, but its placement on Wikipedia as a whole is what is being debated.  Just because we can have lists of stats doesn't mean that we should. hbdragon88 (talk) 23:42, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete We don't have separate lists for specs for other consoles. This would set a bad precedent if this were to stay. hbdragon88 (talk) 23:42, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
 * actually we do. Xbox 360 System Software PlayStation 3 System Software PlayStation Portable System Software. --67.68.152.88 (talk) 05:25, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Yes, the other systems have separate equivalent articles. And I'm not sure what you mean by "bad precedent".  This is discriminate information that's verifiable and noteworthy.  This article should not be a list.  The title of the article is not List of Wii System updates (one did exist and was merged into the article), rather Wii System Software.  What the article really needs is a good treatment with information about the software.  The similar articles on the PS3 and PSP, I believe, are also lacking.  Meanwhile, AfD is not cleanup.  --Son (talk) 06:48, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Let me attack it from the WP:NOT angle, then, since apparently my comparing of the two methods of looking at IINFO seems to have been lost. It lists an example from a radio station, saying not to "list upcoming events, current promotions, phone numbers, current schedules, etc." but to "mention of major events, promotions or historically significant programme lists and schedules."  A blow-by-blow account of what each patch does to the software, in my opinion, does fail the part about listing upcoming events, promotions, schedules, and that it should instead be condensed into a paragraph about the most major and historically significant of the fixes. hbdragon88 (talk) 07:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * First off, if we're discussing deleting this article, then the other two articles, (on the PS3 and PSP) need to be tagged for deletion and combined with this AfD. Secondly, what you're talking about is clean up, not article deletion.  There is well more than enough information to keep it its own article, and not delete/merge into the article Wii.  --Son (talk) 08:06, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, with only one other person voting discussing to outright delete the article, I say, it probably will not be deleted, so I'm being reasonable about my expectations. I, persoanlly, do not think it should be kept, but unless that camp gets a turnabout, it's heading for a merge/keep. hbdragon88 (talk) 08:42, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Group AFDs rarely work, so that's why I didn't nominate the others with this one. RobJ1981 (talk) 17:55, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep It's an important article on the upgrades of the core wii software and shows what has been changed over time —Preceding unsigned comment added by FastKarts (talk • contribs) 11:07, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep extremely notable item, and important list of issues with it. This will have 3rd party refs and reviews in independent magazines and newspapers. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 18:56, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. Someone another (talk) 16:42, 27 December 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.