Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Terrae Expugnandae-Lands to 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 of the debate was delete for now. Sorry. DS 02:34, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Terrae Expugnandae-Lands to Conquer!

This is shameless self-advertising for a rather small mod for Rome: Total War. I suggest a delete. - XX55XX 01:34, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest a Delete also. --Osbus 01:40, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Jesuschex 01:54, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Alphachimp ^talk 06:27, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom Bryan 11:07, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As the creator of this article, I see no reason for deletion. It is linked from and has links too the Rome: Total War article along with the other Modifications. I wish to know WHAT EXACTLY isn't right so I may correct it. Please be helpful and not petty.

Well as the creator of the mod i can say it is not small, being the 4th or 5th most popular for RTw with around 10000 downloads of all the diferent versions of it. If EB and RTR get articles, then so should mine. And i did not write it, it is not shameless self-advertising, the guy above wrote the article completely on his own initiative. If you feel that only a few RTW mods are deserving of having wiki entries then fine delete the entry for my mod, but my mod is popular, considering it has been around for a much shorter space of time than the other two. Lusted - creator of the mod.

Delete. This reads like an advertising brochure and an installation manual, not a disinterested encyclopedia article. Lusted, if you want this kept, address WP:SOFT and ensure that content is neutral and not advertorial in tone. Addressing negatives as well as positives in the article content is always a good start, IMO. Colon el Tom 11:34, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very, well, i will aks the person who wrote the article to make it more neutral in tone and add in negatives. I can understand any reasoning behind the move to deletion and apologise for the admittedly advertising tone of the article, even though i did not write it. - Lusted

EDIT: there, i've shortened the article down, reduced the advertising tone of it, the download links, the features list and added in a large negative aspect section. Is there anything more i can do to reduce the advertising tone of it? And im not sure what you meant by Wiki Soft, im only here because of the guy who created my article, and am new to the whol Wiki thing. - Lusted

Okay, if ound what you meant be Wiki soft, but as i've removed the links to the download servers for the mod, that should make the article comply with it shouldn't it?

DO NOT DELETE

Delete per nom. - Nick C 16:16, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think that there really is a good reason to delete it. There is nothing wrong with a small article about a mod. Quote: This is shameless self-advertising for a rather small mod for Rome: Total War

Totally wrong. This is not shameless self-advertising at all, and TE is not a small mod for RTW. If it were it wouldnt be in the Major Modifications Forum, and people wouldnt call it a Major Mod. -Hader, long time Player of TE

Comment - Although the mod may be active and is widely played by a good section of the RTW community, the entire article reads like an advertisement, as stated above. If the mod's developers want to have an article for it, they can appeal, and rewrite the article for their mod in an unbiased way. For now, I believe that a delete is reasonable for the momment. - XX55XX 18:39, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, i've tried to make the article less biased, i've removed quite a lot from it and added in a negatives section, comments on how to make it more fair would be appreciated, and i will try to rewrite it make it sound less like an advertisement. - Lusted

Delete Per nom. -- Vary | Talk 19:58, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Lusted, I know very well that you are one of the developers of this mod, but if you want an article for your mod, make a it short, give pros and cons for the mod, and learn how to edit articles in general. There are instructions on how to edit Wikipedia. I assure that with some practice, you'll be writing your own articles that will be excepted by the community. Also, making a factions page for your mod is totally un-needed, as it can put into the current article. Throw in a description, include some features, a factions list, and official links. But remember, make it look professional and make it unbiased on your part. Thus, only then will an article be accepted by the community. But for now, I believe that deletion is imminent, so you can create a new page for your mod in the future. - XX55XX 20:02, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it looks like it is. I qwould like to remind you i did not make this article, or the factions list, i have only edited it since it was written, and have tried to rewrite it to make it less of an advertisement, but i can only do so much as i am bound to be biased, though i will have a go at writing a new unbiased version of this article at some point.

Why should it be deleted soon if it is changed by Lusted to be a nonbias article? To me there is no point in deleting it if it will soon be changed. My suggestion, just keep it around and let Lusted change it. Then do what you must.-Hader

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.