Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Sandbox/Dead End (2nd nomination)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was Delete. In contrast to the nomination for "Word Association," only one established Wikipedian has spoken here in defense of the utility of this game for relaxation and motivation in encyclopedic pursuits. The other keep commenters, relatively new to Wikipedia, give no evidence of an understanding WP:ILIKEIT, etc.; Games might be expected to draw newcomers, but -- if they do not serve the interest of regular contributors -- then the community is free to judge that they should not exist. In this case, the consensus of regular editors clearly favors the removal of this content. Xoloz 15:46, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Sandbox/Dead End
Wikipedia is not MySpace, social network, etc. Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia. Write articles, don't play games. Sean William @ 05:04, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Note prior MFD's:
 * Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Sandbox/Dead End
 * Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Sandbox/Games
 * —  xaosflux  Talk 05:24, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not a social networking site.  Leebo  T / C  10:01, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete This isn't particularly interesting as WP:FUN. It's one thing to play the game; it's another thing to record every single move as if it were algebraic chess notation.  Nobody needs that. Shalom Hello 12:43, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Why can't we have this game but still have the Wikipediaholic game or BJAODN? They don't really contribute either. ZapBoy 02:12, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS anyone? WP:ENC--WaltCip 16:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep I note this should have been a single nomination rather than several individual ones and the one below this has many people saying keep. If that one is kept this one should be too. -N 19:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Why?--WaltCip 21:19, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Because they're versions of the same thing? -N 21:51, 12 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete for the reasons listed above to delete. Acalamari 22:31, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - This is one of the greatest games you could ever come front upon to. It might be not encyclopedial material, but I see absolutely no reason why this page should be deleted, since it is article browsing, and who knows if you find out something useful and encyclopedive while following the links of the game. If this is deleted because of the reasons the nominator has stated, then why don't we just all the articles from the "Games" section in WP:FUN? ~Iceshark7 07:25, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Great idea. I'll do that at the end of July.--WaltCip 15:31, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. Keep rationales ignore the WP:NOT problem. Essays in WP namespace are one thing, random games are quite another. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 04:19, 14 July 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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.