Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miscellaneous technology of Command & Conquer
- 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. Krimpet (talk) 02:57, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NOT - another collection of misc information about in-game technology with no real world impact - should be deleted as per previous discussions about the importance (not much) of fictional video game technology. Fredrick day 14:16, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Wikipedia is not a game guide, nor is it an indiscriminate collection of information.Dr bab 14:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- KeepThe article is not a game guide, nor is it indsicrimite. Technology plays a very vital role in the Command and Conquer series. Also noting a large ammount of AfD by Fredrick Day on this topic. He's just going on a witchunt, aliong with the typical fad of deleting anything that dioes not stand up in their eyes. --Eldarone 03:37, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I feel this complies with WP:FICT point #2. While it is relatively minor overall, it is has an important part in the series (much like the pages on GDI and Nod technology). --Gamer007 09:29, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep for reasons stated above. The article is neither indiscriminate nor a game guide. Per WP:FICT articles may be created if encyclopedic treatment results in bloating parent article to unacceptable levels. Peptuck 19:11, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nomination. Wikipedia doesn't need these "miscellaneous" guides. Important information should be put on a general technology page. RobJ1981 19:29, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Krimpet (talk) 00:27, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep - It's arguably background material for a fictional setting. Coren 00:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep The question is off being of major or minor significance per WP:FICT. I would say its just major enough that it needs to be mentioned and too much to fit in well on other pages so it has its own page.--Dacium 01:20, 30 April 2007 (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.