Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of gaming platforms

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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. This is a fairly long debate that has been subject of canvassing, so I'll write a detailed close.

  • LISTCRUFT is an essay and in and of itself not a reason for deletion, while NPOV issues need to be explained a bit better before they make a convincing case for deletion instead of editing and "not an encyclopedic purpose" is too vague to make a good deletion rationale. Many of the keep !votes are making thinly supported (and largely irrelevant) accusations of bad faith or vandalism, "it's useful" arguments, arguments about other lists that fall under OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, claims that GNG is met but no proof (and given the problem of SYNTH, usually I like when people discuss evidence of notability of "comparison of x" list - and I see a rebuttal as well), speculation that the list was written to promote PC gaming and other points that aren't grounded in policy (or don't appear to address any of the delete points). Most of these questionable arguments come from people who are rightly or wrongly tagged as SPA or as canvassed !voters. In addition, there does not seem to be agreement that the list would actually be useful due to concerns about e.g how broad its inclusion criteria are and how complete it could ever be.
  • In terms of actually policy grounded points I see claims that the list is INDISCRIMINATE (not all such claims directly reference that policy but I am inclined to consider BU Rob13 and Elmidae as arguing in that sense), a not overly detailed rebuttal thereof by Slazenger, a concern about "nonsense comparisons" that sounds like a concern about original research (but I am not terribly clear on this), a concern about NOTCATALOG, another about the list being SYNTH as well as a question by Guy Macon about why some consider this article unsalvageable. I am not sure how much weight to assign to arguments that the article is utterly impractical to have, given that a complete article would be extremely long. There are further some proposals to repurpose or narrow the list, without much support or opposition seems like. One such argument proposes the expansion of another article and the redirection of this page to it; I am going to defer to the talk page of that article.

So the long way around, the vast majority of compelling arguments are the ones worrying about the list being INDISCRIMINATE and recommending deletion. And so delete it is. PS: For people who wonder what each ALLCAPS WORD means, just paste https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SOMETHING into your address bar and replace SOMETHING with the ALLCAPS WORD you are curious about Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:39, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison of gaming platforms

Comparison of gaming platforms (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

While the PROD for the article didn't really contain an argument why the list was unencyclopedic, I believe the article is

NPOV issues can't really be fixed without disproportionate effort to expand and maintain. The stats surrounding PCs and other operating systems are far more nebulous than those of the other consoles, making it extremely difficult to be accurate. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 23:57, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. -- ferret (talk) 00:00, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This article and discussion have been linked to by the PC Master Race subreddit, with over 10,000 upvotes. --PresN 12:08, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: The administrators of PCMR has asked for people not to actively contribute or to make accusations. Dark-World25 (talk) 03:03, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • To expand, since arguments have erupted below, and its not as quite as "open and shut" as I would have guessed: The concept is already better covered in a number of other ways that make far more sense. (
    WP:INDISCRIMINATE issue as well. Sergecross73 msg me 13:04, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Per
WP:VALUABLE you should state exactly why the information is "useful". What parts can be kept for it to be encyclopedic?ZXCVBNM (TALK) 05:23, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply
]
The comparison function of this article in itself is pretty usefull to me. The fact that I don't have to visit every individual page but can use the table is enough reason for me to keep this article. Adding to that is the fact that it includes gaming platforms that are not considered consoles makes it even more useful ~ Zirguezi 07:41, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. "It's unencyclopedic" is the last and weakest reason to delete a page, and hasn't been justified. It's reasonably well referenced and edited by consensus until recently. Nomnating it for deletion because people are arguing about it now is not the right way to solve edit disputes. It doesn't appear to "push PC gaming" any more than Fossil fuel pushes oil consumption. —Ben Brockert (42) 05:15, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Large amounts of objective information. If this isn't encyclopedic, most other comparison list articles aren't either.
    canvassed to this discussion. [reply
    ]
Per
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, they may not be encyclopedic either, so that isn't a legitimate reason to keep this one.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 05:26, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply
]
The OTHERSTUFF page itself acknowledges that it can be a valid argument - mainly invalid for deletions when saying things like "other thing exists and this is just as famous". I don't think anyone here is arguing gaming platforms are non-encyclopaedic, and given the wide presence of comparison articles on wiki they're fairly established as being a suitable format for an article. Thus, the article should remain. ReidE96 (talk) 21:29, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - This article consists of a series of unrelated consoles from various generations. This information is presented much more clearly in the "Xth generation of video game consoles" articles. Yoshiman6464 ♫🥚 05:32, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Listcruft is an indiscriminate or trivial list, but a comparison of video game platforms is neither of those things - gaming platforms are themselves an encyclopedic topic, so there is no reason why a list comparing them would be problematic. The PC, IOS, and Android platforms have a lot more total sales than console platforms because of their much greater longevity and use for non-gaming purposes, not because of bias, and the page itself is quite neutral, simply listing out data, as is the case with most list pages. The argument that it is being used to promote PC gaming seems questionable, and it being a lot of work to make better isn't an argument for deletion, but expansion. If you have some idea of what improvements you'd like to see, it might be worth bringing them up on the talk page. My biggest concern with the article as-is is that it is missing the first four generations of gaming consoles, as well as whether or not "PC" should be broken out into multiple platforms, as Android and iOS are considered separately, so it might make sense to break out Windows, DOS, Linux, MacOS, ect. However, neither of those things are reasons to delete the article. Titanium Dragon (talk) 05:37, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that PS3 used to be able to run Linux means that you are essentially comparing hardware with software that is run on hardware. Therefore the article is too problematic to exist in its current form, and if it was distilled to only consoles, it would be rendered superfluous by existing "X generation" articles on consoles.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 05:51, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The definition would have to be sufficiently broad to accept existing gaming platforms while filtering out cases such as programmable graphing calculators, ATMs, printers and smartwatches (yes, some of them do run Doom). I'm thinking along the lines of one of these:
1. A video gaming platform is a computing platform for which one of common consumer use cases is playing video games.
2. A video gaming platform is a computing platform for which playing video games is one of main advertised features or one of main reasons for its' adoption by consumers.
3. A video gaming platform is a computing platform for which playing video games is one of main advertised features, one of main reasons for its' adoption by consumers, or which has been a target platform for production of commercial video game software
Leaning towards the last - if the game industry recognizes it as a valid target platform, then there's no question it should count as a gaming platform. --
The Fifth Horseman (talk) 15:45, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply
]
    • I think it would be quite comprehensive actually. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 13:37, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      • @My name is not dave:Comprehensive maybe, but serving no clear purpose. There is no real reason to compare different console gens, as they will obviously be superior to the last. Comparing the gens amongst themselves is far more arguably enyclopedic because it demonstrates how they competed with each other.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 13:54, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • That would invalidate the comparison - the subject matter are gaming platforms in general and not consoles specifically. --
      The Fifth Horseman (talk) 14:41, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply
      ]
This article, however, isn't that old, and it might be possible to straighten it up with a little more discipline. A master list of gaming platforms is a useful thing to have; the ability to click through on many of these columns to further data could be pretty compelling. This page would have been very useful to me about two months ago, had I thought to search for it. I'd suggest giving the page editors some time (six months??) to adjust the article and bring it up to a more reasonable standard; a minimum requirement would probably be to make number fields sortable as numbers.
It isn't actively causing harm, isn't visibly pushing anyone's agenda, and could potentially serve as an excellent synopsis and launch point. Putting the page editors on notice, and then re-examining in the future would seem a reasonable solution. I'd suggest deferring any deletion decision.
canvassed to this discussion. [reply
]
  • Keep. This article is useful in comparing gaming platforms and only uses facts and number and absolutely no opinions. 84.108.117.2 (talk) 10:13, 12 September 2017 (UTC)— 84.108.117.2 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • Keep As per TitaniumDragons point, I think PC is too all encompassing: The definition of PC the table appears to use could equally well encompass every other item in the table as they are all "personal computing" devices, but that is not a reason to delete.
    canvassed to this discussion. [reply
    ]
  • Delete No encyclopedic value due to nonsense comparisons which are very hard to fix because of massive platform differences. Also the table is severely lacking information regarding some of the cells, for example majority of backward and forward compatibility entries are either misleading or very inaccurate. Same applies to a lot of other entries as well. This table would confuse or mislead a general consumer even if he knew all the definitions and wouldn't be useful to anyone else since individual wiki pages for platforms have much more and better structured information. Also if the table is left and fully completed it would become insanely bloated and again, be no use for anyone. P.S. for the redditors who keep spamming "Keep" without actually reading the article involved, please do, you'll see that it's terrible to begin with. SomeGuy147 (talk) 11:53, 12 September 2017 (UTC)— SomeGuy147 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • Keep This article falls under the category informational list per the wikipedia notability guidelines, and does not meet the criteria for deletion. Aside from that, this demand that the article be deleted is an attempt at vandalism, after the vandals grew frustrated with struggling to effectively maintain their bias in the list. The list itself provides interesting and useful information that is relevant to a number of separate topics which firmly fall within standard wikipedia article guidelines, such as gaming and esports. It also seems that the primary point of contention was mostly revolving around spurious claims about gaming platforms are organized. Yakri (talk) 12:50, 12 September 2017 (UTC)— Yakri (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • Keep There is an encyclopedic value to data pertaining to the usage of various systems used for electronic gaming, which is itself a form of leisure; and how human beings pursue leisure is important for the purposes of research and historical posterity.
    canvassed
    to this discussion.
  • Keep keep the comparison as following: comparison between latest models of pc-xbox-playstation-nintendo. And throw other remaining consoles and platforms in a different table. This way, the comparison is fair and the article is actually useful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kenm v2 (talk • contribs) 13:28, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

— Kenm v2 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

  • Keep the comparison article, with the same modifications Kenm2 suggested above me. There is nothing on the article that makes it worthy for deletion. Lempamo (talk) 13:36, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Delete The core problem here is the last column on the table, trying to show how many units were sold; while consoles can be assumed to be principally used for gaming, we cannot make that assumption for PCs or mobile platforms, and when you consider the longevity of the PC platform, the table does appear to be a very poor form of synthesis to show how much better that the PC platform is than the others, sweeping some facts like that under the rug. There is a place for comparing the best estimates of playerbase (groups like ESA and EEDAR have such figures), but that begs a fresh start without so much focus on the technical specs. My "weak" here is only because there may be some content in this that is neutral that could be used towards that, but I don't think a whole lot. --MASEM (t) 13:48, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Meets notability guidelines and does not meet the criteria for deletion. Suppafly (talk) 13:51, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: per above, bad faith nomination, topic certainly meets Wikipedia guidelines, and complexity of the issue. Javert2113 (talk) 14:07, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - The PC should be allowed to compared to consoles,so people realize that there is a better option than some sort of overpriced plastic boxes. --
    canvassed to this discussion. [reply
    ]
  • Keep but the article is incomplete and additional information on other gaming platforms should be added. The ones included in the article now are not the only 'gaming platforms' in existence, so we should aim to add more information here, instead of taking it away. However, this means the page will likely need to be reorganised to make information more clear. Perhaps the gaming systems could be separated into different sections to make the article more clear, for example a section about dedicated systems (of which I mean things that are mainly used for gaming, such as Game Boys, Game Boy advances etc) and a section about non-dedicated systems (ones which may have additional non-gaming functions, such as the Xbox One or smart phone devices).--Stikman (talk) 18:14, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This page is being targeted for deletion because people don't like the facts on it, the same people who are nominating it for deletion are editing it to make it look worse. --
    !DERP/3/PiM Talk 19:14, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]
The humourous value of each of these purblind little outbursts, and the fact each is basically a request to completely disregard the comment, must be entirely lost on the gathered reddit crowd... --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:04, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Let's get it out of way: I have been canvassed. Now, on the subject:
This said, the article has some issues that warrant a heavy retooling:
1. The article overlaps thematically with
list of home video game consoles and list of home computers
(to an extent)
2. The article suffers from trying to integrate multiple sets of information about its' subjects into a singular table. Some of them would fit better into distinct articles.
3. The article suffers from poorly defined scope - some of the edit wars and vandalism accusations revolve around disagreements as to the definition of a "video gaming platform" . A definition has to be formulated regardless of the articles ultimate fate. Video game defines it as "the specific combination of electronic components or computer hardware which, in conjunction with software, allows a video game to operate", but that definition is overly broad (you know how many platforms Doom has been ported to, right? ).
Proposals:
1. A video gaming platform is a computing platform for which one of common consumer use cases is playing video games.
2. A video gaming platform is a computing platform for which playing video games is one of main advertised features or one of main reasons for its' adoption by consumers.
3. A video gaming platform is a computing platform for which playing video games is one of main advertised features, one of main reasons for its' adoption by consumers, or which has been a target platform for production of commercial video game software
I feel that these are sufficiently permissive while filtering out cases such as programmable graphing calculators, ATMs, printers and smartwatches. Leaning towards the last definition, myself.
4. The article is woefully incomplete in its present scope. To be exhaustive, it would have to cover nearly all platforms on both
list of home video game consoles and list of home computers
.
5. The article lists PC as if it was a single, homogenous platform. Ignoring the matter of hardware, each operating system (or, in case of Windows, a family of operating systems) formed a software platform not usually compatible with the others.
  • Whether the article is merged with
    list of home video game consoles
    or retained, PC should be split into separate sub-platforms - we need a consensus on the lines along which that categorization should be made. An approach that seems reasonable would be using the operating system as a basis (PC/Booter, PC/DOS, PC/Windows, PC/Linux).
6. The article naming is itself somewhat problematic - it's labeled as a comparison, where not all of the aspects are directly comparable (as noted by other editors). Relabeling it as a list of gaming platforms would lead to less confusion.
--
The Fifth Horseman (talk) 14:41, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Keep if this is deleted you should delete Reddit and pc so keep it unless you want to delete our website Reddit article — Preceding
    canvassed to this discussion. — Csgo993334 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Comparison_of_gaming_platforms&oldid=1136113000"