Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of computer and video fighting games

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 no consensus, defaulting to keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 09:15, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant with the category fighting games, and should be deleted based on the precedent set by the deletion of List of beat 'em ups. Luvcraft 22:47, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Fopkins | Talk 23:47, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Alternative: Even though I'm the one who created this AfD, I just had an even better idea: rename the article "computer and video fighting games in need of articles", add it to the fighting games category, and remove all the blue links. That way it is no longer redundant with the category, and also links to items without articles, which is the one major thing that lists do that categories do not. I also propose that this be the preferred treatment for all lists that are redundant with categories. Luvcraft 00:42, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • You'd need to move it into the Wikipedia namespace. Fagstein 05:58, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I found the perfect place for it: Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and video games/Requests. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 02:27, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • No. Segregating redlinks and bluelinks to separate daughter pages would remove context from both lists. The two pages would want to link to each other, in violation of the ban on links to Wikipedia: from article space. (And, ironically, the Wikipedia: daughter would be impossible to categorize along with its sister.) The process for adding either new articles or new links would become more labor-intensive and prone to error -- and less transparent in its history. And, need I repeat myself-- there is no redundancy to be fixed, and redlinks are hardly the best reason to keep lists. Melchoir 19:38, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep; lists and categories are not redundant. This simple list already does two things the category cannot: it lists "prominent examples", and it presents both the English and Japanese titles where applicable. Melchoir 01:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • The alternate titles are listed in each game's article, and redirects take care of any attempts to search for the article under its alternate name. As for the "prominent examples", there are plenty of games in the list that aren't prominent at all, like Bio F.R.E.A.K.S. and Fighter's Destiny, so it would require a lot of cuts before it could stand as a "list of prominent fighting games" article, which is not its intended purpose in the first place. Luvcraft 02:46, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • We do not delete things just because they have yet to live up to their potential. If the list needs fixing, then fix it. I mention alternate titles because nowhere else on Wikipedia will you find all this information on one page. Certainly not in a category. Melchoir 19:41, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • But what is its potential? All we have is an alphabetical list of articles, which is exactly what a category is designed to give you. If someone wants to turn this into more than that, go ahead, but otherwise it's redundant and should be deleted. Fagstein 06:36, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Redundant with category. Fagstein 05:58, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. However, this article does need a short description of the games in order to warrant an article.guitarhero777777 18:10, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agreed. This article could turn into a good "list of notable fighting games and series" by removing the non-notable ones and providing synopses for the rest. Luvcraft 19:59, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Melchoir. Key being, this list is not necessarily redundant - including information like year and developer would make this much more useful, not to mention that a list can contain both red links and non-link games - games that are in the genre, but won't have articles, and/or games that are already in a series article but have no individual article. For instance, all the Guilty Gear games, but there are also plenty of fighters that don't have or don't need pages that would still warrant a mention here. --SevereTireDamage 18:11, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Lists and categories are not mutually exclusive, but complimentary. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 22:23, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Redundant: delete it If an article for a franchise was written correctly someone should be able to access all sub articles through an initial disambiguation page. If an article is a red-link, it can be moved to a "request" page as suggested by the nominator. --Kunzite 01:29, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Per above. Havok (T/C/c) 05:54, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. SevereTireDamage 08:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - categories are easier to maintain, more up to date and do a better job thanthis list. BlueValour 19:34, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Prominent games are already covered in the genre article and a simple list of titles is redundant with the category. Ace of Sevens 18:19, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• keep per above; a maintainable and useful list. — brighterorange (talk) 03:24, 21 August 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.