Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Control deck (2nd nomination)

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. --Coredesat 23:07, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Control deck (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Wikipedia is not a game guide. Since the last afd, the following precedent has been formed:

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Yu-Gi-Oh! Deck Formats and Strategies
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aggro deck
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Combo deck
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Midgame deck

MER-C 05:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See also: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Magic: The Gathering deck types.

• Delete per nom. Shimeru 07:40, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as unsourced, POV, and a game guide. Replacing the many wonderful MTG fan sites (and the official site) is not the goal of Wikipedia as I understand it. Compiling the world's largest externally verifiable, encyclopedic online resource is. -- saberwyn 08:52, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Delete. Delete only if the related article is not deleted. Spinach Dip 09:13, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, WP:NOT a how-to-guide, no reliable source, another piece of fancruft. --Terence Ong _{(C | R)} 11:54, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete this article is useless to anyone not playing the game. If there is a relevant CCG wiki, then transwiki might be an option, otherwise trash it. EvilCouch 12:56, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge back into the Magic: The Gathering deck types article. One article is sufficient. I could even get behind a delete since the information is already there. FrozenPurpleCube 14:26, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per the other deleted deck types. Andrew Levine 14:51, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per all the precedent. Danny Lilithborne 22:00, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. --Wizardman 16:35, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.