Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pokémon ability: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
→[[Pokémon ability]]: Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks#WP:POKEMON_redirect_issue, replaced: WP:POKEMON → WP:Pokémon test |
||
| (75 intermediate revisions by 36 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page. ''
<!--Template:Afd top
Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
The result was '''keep'''. - [[User:Mailer diablo|Mailer Diablo]] 08:54, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
===[[Pokémon ability]]===
*Wikipedia is not a game guide. '''Edit:''' I just want to add right up front for the closing admin to make sure there is no confusion that this article is merely a list of every ability the various pokemon have in the various pokemon games, what these abilities do, and which pokemon have them. Therefore the sole purpose of the article is to be an in-depth guide to a facet of a video game. Here is a quote from [[WP:NOT]]: "Instruction manuals - while Wikipedia has descriptions of people, places, and things, Wikipedia articles should not include instruction - advice (legal, medical, or otherwise), suggestions, or contain "how-to"s. This includes tutorials, walk-throughs, instruction manuals, '''video game guides''', and recipes." (Emphasis added) To quote [[Wikipedia:Deletion Policy]]: "[I]t's worth noting that (as with all Wikipedia consensus decisions), the purpose of a discussion is to bring out a "sense of the community" and the valid points for or against each view. So deletion is not a strict "count of votes", but rather a '''judgement based upon experience and taking into account the policy-related points made by those contributing''' (emphasis added). The policy arguement for deletion is that it is a violation of the WP:NOT point quoted above. The keep votes are based mostly on an desire by pokemon fans to keep an article they have worked on and find useful, but no arguement has been made relating to policy, nor has the proposition that the article violates WP:NOT been refuted. Just some food for thought. [[User:Indrian|Indrian]] 01:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*Wikipedia is not a game guide. [[User:Indrian|Indrian]] 01:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)▼
*'''Whoa, hold it!''' Wouldn't it be more appropriate to discuss this on the article's talk page instead of instantly nominating it for deletion? I'm not for deleting the article, but I also see how it doesn't qualify for the Best Article award. Maybe it could use more expository text and have more of an overview of what a Pokémon ability is instead of being merely a huge list. Several people put a lot of work into this article (there's a lot of Pokémon to list and link); it'd be a shame to lose it so fast. --[[User:Brandon Dilbeck|Brandon Dilbeck]] 01:48, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
**It is none of my concern whether a lot of people have worked on this article or not. Please read [[WP:NOT]], paying particular attention to the part about wikipedia not being a game guide. This article violates policy, and I see no way this article could be changed to not violate policy. AfD is the proper venue for this discussion. [[User:Indrian|Indrian]] 01:53, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
**I say '''Keep''' because this article is relatively new and could be fixed to have more generic information in it, rather than being a big list of data. With the new Pokémon game coming out soon, there may soon be a plethora of information to add. --[[User:Brandon Dilbeck|Brandon Dilbeck]] 02:05, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - Though there are other wikis where concerned Pokemaniacs can harvest info, a small article is ok.[[User:Bakasuprman|Bakaman]] [[User talk:Bakasuprman|<sub style="color:blue;">Bakatalk</sub>]] 01:58, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
**Actually, no it is not because it violates policy. I hope that if this keep vote trend continues the admin who closes this AfD will take a close look at the article and a close look at policy and realize that this article is in violation. [[User:Indrian|Indrian]] 02:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' [[User:TJ Spyke|TJ Spyke]] 02:01, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom - we're not a game guide, although there are obviously sites out there which are or don't mind being. [[User:BigHaz|BigHaz]] 02:21, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
**Further, the information on the specific abilities of the creatures either is already or should probably be in the articles on the creatures themselves, rather than here. This makes it look very gameguidey. [[User:BigHaz|BigHaz]] 05:12, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Delete''' [[WP:NOT]], [[WP:V]], [[WP:OR]]. Even merging is not an option as nothing here can be saved without looking like a 'how to' or 'guide'. -[[User:Bschott|<span style="color:Purple;">Brian</span>]] <sup>([[User_talk:Bschott|<span style="color:orange;">How am I doing?</span>]])</sup> 02:42, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per Brian. [[User:Leuko|Leuko]] 03:02, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' and prosify. Possibly provide longer, more gradual intro to abilities. This is not OR, the game guides for all the G3 games list abilities and descriptions, as well as which Pokemon they are on. I will gradually be rewriting/prosifying/modifying this article. [[User:TrackerTV|TrackerTV]] <small>([[User talk:TrackerTV|CW]]|[[Special:Contributions/TrackerTV|Castform]]|[[Special:Emailuser/TrackerTV|Green Valley]])</small> 03:17, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
**The work is complete. A lot of it was copied from in-game descriptions. The new listings note similarities to other abilities as well as stat boosts. The game is very vague on the latter and does not cover the former. I also notice [[WP:V]] is a non-factor, it's also not [[WP:OR|OR]]. [[User:TrackerTV|TrackerTV]] <small>([[User talk:TrackerTV|CW]]|[[Special:Contributions/TrackerTV|Castform]]|[[Special:Emailuser/TrackerTV|Green Valley]])</small> 03:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Transwikify to Wikibooks''' [[User:Klingoncowboy4|kc4 - the Server Monkey Enforcer]] 03:36, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
**I don't think this would be good on 'Books. [[User:TrackerTV|TrackerTV]] <small>([[User talk:TrackerTV|CW]]|[[Special:Contributions/TrackerTV|Castform]]|[[Special:Emailuser/TrackerTV|Green Valley]])</small> 03:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' it's a game guide. Move somewhere else if there's anywhere that wants it, but we shouldn't have it. [[User:Opabinia regalis|Opabinia regalis]] 03:40, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Delete''': It's not fit to have its own article. Perhaps certain information could be merged into the ''Ruby'' and ''Sapphire'' article, as long as it doesn't list out the abilities and their effects... That's irrelevant to Wikipedia.--[[User:Coltonblue|Coltonblue]] 03:58, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Although it could do with references moving onto the article itself instead of via wikilinks, it passes [[WP:V]], my most important test. For the [[WP:NOTABLE]] crowd, it also clearly passes by virtue of being [[WP:Pokémon test|Pokémon]]. The information detailed within this article cannot be currently aquired in a concise form within wikipedia, and hence this article serves a purpose. I also see no instructions on the explicit use of these abilities (implict use by their description alone is unavoidable, but hence not an issue), or a guide about them. [[User:LinaMishima|LinaMishima]] 06:13, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
**I also believe that AfD without prior discussion on a long-standing and well-edited article is very bad practice. Discussion first will result in either a consensus to delete in advance (saving a lot of trouble), or the article being fixed. [[User:LinaMishima|LinaMishima]] 06:19, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Reading this article doesn't help make me a better Pokémon player, hence it's not really game guide-esque. --[[User:SaturnYoshi|SaturnYoshi]] 06:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' Hold up! Where does it cite sources? Why should this article be allowed to ignore [[WP:V]], [[WP:CITE]], and [[WP:RS]] when all other articles must follow them? While I can respect the feelings that some of the other editors have completely, the fact of the matter is that this AfD is not about censorship or picking favorites or suggesting that pokemon isn't important to children or such. <b>It is about if the Article can pass all of Wikipedia's rules.</b> Let me help out a bit so the people new to wikipedia understand. The real problem with this article is that it doesn't follow the three pillars of wikipedia. An article must be [[WP:V|Verifiable]] through multiple, reliable, reputable, independent, third-party sources. It must not be [[WP:OR|original research]], which means there have to be sources to back up the claims of the author(s) and all information provided in the article. It must also have a [[WP:NPOV|neutral point-of-view]] and not show bias. As a guideline for the above rules, an article must [[WP:CITE|cite it's information]] with [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] and be must be [[WP:ENC|encyclopaedic]]. This article fails to meet [[WP:V]], sections of [[WP:OR]] (if not all of OR), does not follow the guideline of [[WP:CITE]] or [[WP:RS]]. Wikipedia is a tertiary source that includes material on the basis of <b>verifiability, not truth.</b> This article <b>must</b> cite ''multiple, reliable, secondary, independent of the organization, non-trivial, third-party sources such as books, magazines, and papers that have national and/or international coverage.'' The articles must be based, or completely focused on just pokemon (and in this case, the powers). Just a mention in passing is not acceptable (as it is concidered a trivial source...even if it is in the New York Times...the source isn't trivial, but the coverage by the source was). So far no one has shown that there are reliable secondary sources that fit this criteria for this article. '''[[WP:V|Wikipedia:Verifiability]]''' is one of Wikipedia's three content-guiding policies. The other two are [[WP:OR|Wikipedia:No original research]] and [[WP:NPOV|Wikipedia:Neutral point of view]] (as explained above). Jointly, these policies determine the type and quality of material that is acceptable in the main namespace. They should not be interpreted in isolation from one another, and editors should therefore try to familiarize themselves with all three. <B>The principles upon which these three policies are based are non-negotiable and cannot be superseded by other policies or guidelines, or by editors' consensus.</b> In essence, please explain why this article should be allowed to not follow WP:V when all other articles must. While we know that pokemon is Verifiable, where are the New York Times, Washington Post, or CBS nightly news report on the pokemon abilities? I hope this helps understand my take on this discussion. --[[User:Bschott|<span style="color:Purple;">Brian</span>]] <sup>([[User_talk:Bschott|<span style="color:orange;">How am I doing?</span>]])</sup> 07:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
**'''Reply''' There are ungoing debates over the use of wikilinks as references. Whilst featuring the references themselves is generally better, if a direct wikilink has the reference this also tends to count. Secondly, Primary sources are valid sources for ''indisputable facts'', such as the engine of a car, or rules within a game. If you read [[WP:NOR]] and [[WP:RS]], this use of primary sources is allowed, if not perfect. It should also be noted that the article clearly meets [[WP:NPOV]]. [[User:LinaMishima|LinaMishima]] 08:32, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Weak keep'''. The section where it lists what abilities each Pokémon has should simply be on the individual Pokémon pages, however a general article describing the gameplay mechanics of abilities (i.e., everything above the list) is fine with me as long as it doesn't become a game guide. [[User:BryanG|BryanG]]<sup>[[User talk:BryanG|(talk)]]</sup> 07:11, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' I would change to keep ONLY if the lists were removed permanently and sources cited for all the information above the lists (and not links to other wikipedia articles but actual links outside of wikipedia. Or books/magazine/tv references) --[[User:Bschott|<span style="color:Purple;">Brian</span>]] <sup>([[User_talk:Bschott|<span style="color:orange;">How am I doing?</span>]])</sup> 07:25, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
**How do you cite a video game? I'm just ignorant--I'd do it if I knew how. Regardless, I didn't use any external resources to write the upper paragraphs (above the list), just my own personal knowledge of what Pokémon have which abilities. Besides, the [[List of Mario series items]] is also video-game-related and it doesn't seem to cite any resources as well. --[[User:Brandon Dilbeck|Brandon Dilbeck]] 14:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
**'''Comment''' So Brandon, by your comment you admit this is [[WP:OR|original research]]. --[[User:Bschott|<span style="color:Purple;">Brian</span>]] <sup>([[User_talk:Bschott|<span style="color:orange;">How am I doing?</span>]])</sup> 15:19, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
**My research wasn't original; this information can be found in many places on the Internet and it's been published in many playing guides and even in the game itself. I was just stating ''why'' the upper paragraphs didn't have citations--because I didn't know how. But I think I got them right now. --[[User:Brandon Dilbeck|Brandon Dilbeck]] 19:17, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' as a central concept of the Pokémon game, but maybe remove the listing of specific abilities. [[User:JIP|<span style="color:#CC0000;">J</span><span style="color:#00CC00;">I</span><span style="color:#0000CC;">P</span>]] | [[User talk:JIP|Talk]] 09:18, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*I'm getting the feeling that the insisting of deletion here may be prejudice against Pokemon. Although I'm not a Pokemon fan myself I do agree with those who say the article may merely just need cleaning up rather than a full scale deletion. --[[User:204.116.124.117|204.116.124.117]] 09:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' This whole Pokemon cruft thing has gotten out of hand. They should really start their own wiki along with professional wrestling and the legions of wannabe indie bands. --[[User:Xrblsnggt|Xrblsnggt]] 09:57, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' void of any encyclopedic value. Wikipedia is not a publisher of game guides. --[[User:Mecanismo|Mecanismo]] | [[User talk:Mecanismo|Talk]] 10:23, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep — ''' article needs to be cleanup. [[User:Terence Ong|Ter]][[Wikipedia:Esperanza|<span style="color:green;">e</span>]][[User:Terence Ong|nce Ong]] <sub>([[User talk:Terence Ong|T]] | [[Special:Contributions/Terence Ong|C]])</sub> 14:50, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' As one of the main contributors to this page(fixing links, adding secondary effects), I believe this article should stay. As mentioned before it is a central concept of the games, and as a central concept I believe there should be a page describing and listing all of the abilities. The article does need a bit cleaning up, but other than that there is no reason for deletion. [[User:0-172|0-172]] 16:39, 24 August (UTC)
**A page listing and describing all the abilities is a game guide in violation of policy. Cleaning it up will not save it. [[User:Indrian|Indrian]] 17:10, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
***I'm all for having an article that explains what Pokémon abilities are, which assumes no prior experience of Pokémon, and generally describes some of the various types of abilities. But a listing of each specific ability and which Pokémon creatures have that is utter gamecruft, and should be removed. [[User:JIP|<span style="color:#CC0000;">J</span><span style="color:#00CC00;">I</span><span style="color:#0000CC;">P</span>]] | [[User talk:JIP|Talk]] 18:33, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
****However surely the article you propose, stripped of descriptions of all but a handful of abilities and without additional information is of less intrinsic value than the current article? It would, however, be more immediately accessable - but this is easily fixable in the current article. [[User:LinaMishima|LinaMishima]] 19:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*****The question is not one of value but of being encyclopedic. If one wants a description of Pokemon abilities, one should go to GameFAQs. Wikipedia is not a substitute for the internet. [[User:Indrian|Indrian]] 19:42, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
******I don't see why not--isn't it Wikipedia's goal to absorb as much knowledge as possible? I don't see why this list should be less important than a [[list of Gargoyles episodes]]--are we implying that television is more important than video games? Never mind, this isn't the place to discuss this. --[[User:Brandon Dilbeck|Brandon Dilbeck]] 20:23, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*******If Wikipedia's goal was to "absorb as much knowledge as possible", then every single non-notable vanity article would have been kept. I've written articles about my former company, a fan club I'm part of, and myself. All got deleted for non-notability, and I agree with the result. If you really want "as much knowledge as possible", I can document every single old newspaper, empty beer can, and ball of dust I have lying around. [[User:JIP|<span style="color:#CC0000;">J</span><span style="color:#00CC00;">I</span><span style="color:#0000CC;">P</span>]] | [[User talk:JIP|Talk]] 20:59, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Cleanup''' — Based on the desriptions of the abilities, which delve into things like HP's &c., most of the content is pretty clearly game guide. It needs a significant re-write to bring it in line with wikipedias consensus policies. I suppose the creature combos could be moved to the individual creature pages, in the manner of "other creatures with this ability". — [[User:RJHall|RJH]] ([[User_talk:RJHall|''talk'']]) 19:35, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
*<small>'''Note''': This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Japan|list of Japan-related deletions]]. </small> <small>-- [[User:Neier|Neier]] 21:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)</small>
* <span style="font-size: smaller;">Note: This debate has been added to the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and video games/Deletion|list of CVG deletions]]. [[User:TJ Spyke|TJ Spyke]] 22:01, 24 August 2006 (UTC)</span> [[User:TJ Spyke|TJ Spyke]] 22:01, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' per nom. -- [[User:Selmo|<b>Selmo</b>]] 00:12, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' I'm not sure the full list of abilities is necessary, but I don't see anything wrong with having the article. [[User:Ace of Sevens|Ace of Sevens]] 00:34, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep''' [[User:Edgecution|Edgecution]] 00:56, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep''' per [[User:Brandon Dilbeck|Brandon Dilbeck]] - [[User:Sonic3KMaster|<span style="color:#0099FF;">'''Sonic'''</span><span style="color:#CC0033;">'''3K'''</span><span style="color:#0099FF;">'''Master'''</span>]]<b><span style="color:#000000;">(鉄也)</span></b><sup>[[User talk:Sonic3KMaster|<span style="color:#00CC66;">''(talk)''</span>]]</sup> 01:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Pokemon = cool. [[User:Allon Fambrizzi|Allon Fambrizzi]]Allon Fambrizzi
*'''Delete''' WP is not a game guide. [[User:HongQiGong|--- Hong Qi Gong]] 03:53, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' and cleanup, explaining important aspects of games is part of providing an encyclopedic treatment. Not a "how-to" so the prohibition on game guides is obviously being misapplied. [[User:Kappa|Kappa]] 04:01, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep & cleanup''' <strong>[[User:Havok|Havok]]</strong> [[User_talk:Havok|(T]]/[[User:Havok/Contributions|C]]/[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Interiot/Tool2/code.js?username=Havok c]) 12:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' One day, we will have accumulated enough pokemoncruft to create an entirely separate pokemonwiki and we can all celebrate by transwikying this ballast! [[User:Eusebeus|Eusebeus]] 20:33, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
**That exists, [http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Main_Page right here]. [[User:TrackerTV|TrackerTV]] <small>([[User talk:TrackerTV|CW]]|[[Special:Contributions/TrackerTV|Castform]]|[[Special:Emailuser/TrackerTV|Green Valley]])</small> 00:03, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
▲*
*Dare I cite [[WP:PKMN]]? [[User:TrackerTV|TrackerTV]] <small>([[User talk:TrackerTV|CW]]|[[Special:Contributions/TrackerTV|Castform]]|[[Special:Emailuser/TrackerTV|Green Valley]])</small> 00:06, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
**You certainly can if you want. But what an essay which amounts to a personal opinion of the author(s) proves about whether or not this article violates a policy is beyond me. [[User:Indrian|Indrian]] 00:16, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
* '''comment'''. I don't understand the jump between an article being ''about a game'' and being a ''game guide''. To my mind, a game guide gives you hints and suggestions about strategies, etc. Documenting facts about a game need not constitute a guide. Also, for articles about fictional works, the work itself often serves as a perfectly good primary source. <span style="font-size: 10px">— [[User:Brighterorange|<span style="padding : 0px 1px 1px 1px; border : 1px solid #FFE7B0; background: #FFFFFF ; color: #FF9600">brighterorange</span>]] ([[User_talk:Brighterorange|talk]])</span> 04:40, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
**I agree that this can be a difficult area to define. To me, it usually comes down to focus. Obviously, an article must give a general overview of how a game works in order to convey the subject properly. However, when an article begins to go into every facet of a game, or a part of a game, then it is starting to cross the line. By analogy, a plot summary is necessary to explaining a novel, but a chapter by chapter summary goes beyond explaining what the book is about and becomes a substitute for the novel itself. As for pokemon, describing the role abilities play in the game and giving one or two examples helps inform on the game. Something this comprehensive can only be useful to one attempting to formulate game strategy even if the article does not give specific strategies itself. In other words, only one playing the game requires this level of deatil. That, to me, is what makes it a game guide. [[User:Indrian|Indrian]] 04:51, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
*I have added [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Pok%C3%A9mon_ability#Categorization_proposal a proposal] to the article's talk page. This would remove all the Pokemon names from the list and would certainly make the article seem less Pokecrufty. Please provide feedback on this proposal. --[[User:Brandon Dilbeck|Brandon Dilbeck]] 05:49, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
**I disagree and would put the Catagories into a Deletion review, personally. There is no reason for catagories on 'growth' or 'lightning' just to catagorize the characters. The articles on the characters are enough. There is no need to catagorize them or even have a 'list' like this. Remove the list, leave the top paragraph but reference the hell out of it. Why do we need a list when it is easy enough for people to look directly at each characters' page and/or get a free game guide/FAQ online? The only people who would be interested in knowing this information are the people who play the games...hence it is a game guide. --[[User:Bschott|<span style="color:Purple;">Brian</span>]] <sup>([[User_talk:Bschott|<span style="color:orange;">How am I doing?</span>]])</sup> 16:30, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
***Please see my reply to that in [[:Talk:Pok%C3%A9mon_ability#Categorization_proposal|the article's talk page]]. I don't want to cause the same discussion to happen in two different places. --[[User:Brandon Dilbeck|Brandon Dilbeck]] 17:00, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' didn't we delete this a while ago? On their own, abilities lack any distinct encylopedic value. [[User:HighwayCello|H]][[User:HighwayCello/Esperanza|<span style="color:#009933;">ig</span>]][[User:HighwayCello|hway]] <b>[[User talk:HighwayCello|<sup style="color:#FFCBDB;">Return to Oz...</sup>]]</b> 23:01, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>
| |||