Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nation-simulation game
- 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. Cbrown1023 02:20, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Primarily Wikipedia:Original research. Information in it duplicates the information found in Government simulation, and the now deleted Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Geo-political web-based simulator. A number of actual nationsims have also been deleted through AfD. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 15:30, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- ...and more to go: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Government Simulation (2 nomination) `'mikka 19:25, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, per being the nominator. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 15:30, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Conditional delete. My comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Government simulation (2nd nomination) apply here too (except that in this case, I haven't marked up the article). -- RoySmith (talk) 18:18, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I disagree that this is original research. However, sources are definitely needed. --- RockMFR 18:23, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: How is it not original research? All "sources" I can find are hardly worthy of being called as such - they are nationsims themselves and as thus does not constitute a third party. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 18:31, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment It seems odd that you acknowledge the existance of this category (what you're calling nationsims) yet you want to delete all the articles that deal with the subject. Tarinth 19:19, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: It is not like I am on a crusade on nationsims. I don't hate nationsims, and I acknowledge their existence. I just don't think they're notable and/or verifiable enough to be in the encyclopedia; just like everything else I think should be deleted. You may review my contributions to the Wikipedia: namespace if you so wish; while I do actively look for unencyclopedic nationsim articles they do not constitute my only involvement in the AfD process. Oh, and please stop cutting my signature in half! :( Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 19:31, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment It seems odd that you acknowledge the existance of this category (what you're calling nationsims) yet you want to delete all the articles that deal with the subject. Tarinth 19:19, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: How is it not original research? All "sources" I can find are hardly worthy of being called as such - they are nationsims themselves and as thus does not constitute a third party. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 18:31, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
MergeRedirect to Government simulation, which appears to deal with the same subject. If anything is in this article that isn't duplicated, merge it there. Tarinth 18:45, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]- Comment: it should be noted that Government simulation has been nominated for deletion (yes, also by me). Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 18:58, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I think Government simulation is a fairly obvious category of computer games/simulations that exist, and seems like a better title for the article. The collective article could be made better, but I don't see any reason to get rid of it. Tarinth 19:14, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The problem is reliable sources. If it is a so natural term, why it is not among Strategy games yet? Even a "natural" classification is original research, if not backed by a source which explicitely and directly discusses this category, not just mentions the word. `'mikka 19:30, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I think Government simulation is a fairly obvious category of computer games/simulations that exist, and seems like a better title for the article. The collective article could be made better, but I don't see any reason to get rid of it. Tarinth 19:14, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: it should be noted that Government simulation has been nominated for deletion (yes, also by me). Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 18:58, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- del nn original researcg. `'mikka 19:25, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The subject exists, it can be substantiated with numerous games in this area. Arguing over what to call it is a subject that has nothing to do with deletion, but the closest comparison would be the recent discussion on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ghost_ramp_%28second_nomination%29 where there was widespread agreement that the subject of the article existed, but there was a lot of disagreement on the particular wording of the article's title--ultimately resolving in calling them "Unused highway" as a vague and generic term. I don't think this is any different. Tarinth 21:08, 30 December 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.