Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hazardous Environment Combat Unit

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, with a subsequent recreation as a redirect to Half-Life (series). seresin | wasn't he just...? 07:37, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hazardous Environment Combat Unit

)

We've been through this before... no assertion of notability, no tertiary/secondary sources or out of universe info on conception or reception... I had previously merged this after contested prod, but a user reverted my change. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 18:30, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the
list of Fictional characters-related deletion discussions. —Pixelface (talk) 05:41, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This debate has been included in the
list of Game-related-related deletion discussions. —Pixelface (talk) 05:41, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This debate has been added to the
list of video game deletions. Pixelface (talk) 05:41, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Comment which article did you merge it to? --Pixelface (talk) 05:42, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm guessing to Gordon Freeman which has a "HEV Suit" section (which I suggest merging any new material (doesn't look like there is) into. --MASEM 05:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - This article is about a special forces unit that appears in four games, rather than the suit that Gordon Freeman wears. --Pixelface (talk) 05:58, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - It appears that David Fuchs redirected this article to Half-Life (series) after the prod was removed[1] and no content was merged anywhere. --Pixelface (talk) 06:01, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - There was a {{
    mergefrom}} tag on March 1 saying "merge complete"[3] but I see no merged content in the Half-Life (series) article. On Talk:Half-Life (series)#Races merge, I see a link to Talk:Half-Life (series)/merge which has some information, but no information on the Hazardous Environment Combat Unit (except a mention in the Black Ops section). I don't think a merge is necessarily a bad idea, it just doesn't look like it's happened yet. --Pixelface (talk) 06:09, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    - I should clarify; I wanted to delete all of the races, but someone suggested that they go into the Half life series article. Since there was too much cruft in each and no one responded on the merge request, I shunted all the info into Talk:Half-Life (series)/merge so whoever could edit and transfer what they saw fit to the article. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 17:33, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - I think you may have missed this article when you were merging. --Pixelface (talk) 11:15, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, notable enemy that appears in four notable videogames. All of those videogames have been reviewed so I'm sure information on conception and reception can be found. As a sidenote, if the content of the article was merged like the nominator says (it wasn't), the article should not be deleted but should remain as a redirect so the edit history gives proper attribution per the GFDL to everyone who contributed to the text. --Pixelface (talk) 06:58, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Mere game cruft; not notable. Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:36, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Take a look at
  WP:ITSCRUFT. --Pixelface (talk) 11:55, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Comment', I've added reception info to the article, citing GameSpot and IGN. More can be found at
Game Rankings (HL, HL:OF) and Metacritic(HL). --Pixelface (talk) 18:00, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete still no significant coverage; mentions only in game reviews. Fails
WP:N. Percy Snoodle (talk) 11:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
These are videogame characters. This article doesn't "fail"
WP:N. These characters have received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. --Pixelface (talk) 11:42, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Comment While the sources Pixelface added do address notability... I'm not sure if they go to the best lengths to do so. They seem to be more about the game's AI engine then the fictional aspects of the soldiers themselves. If this article is kept, it needs major cleanup: the list of weapons at the end is not appropriate. --MASEM 16:37, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The artificial intelligence of these characters is notable. And the resemblance of the weapons used by the characters to actual weapons is information that can be verified. --Pixelface (talk) 16:41, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - The AI being notable points more to the notability of the game engine and the AI it used than to anything specific about the characters. However, this is a caution; I'm not sure if this fails either way yet, it would be better to get something more specific to the characters. As for weapons, it is general practice for video game articles is that weapon lists from video games is considered indiscriminate info even if they can be verified against real world weapons; only if the weapon itself stands out from reviews or development info should it be included . It can be stated that the weapons carried by the HECU are similar to real-world firearms, but there's no point in listing them out. That the weapon list is currently included is not affecting the article's notability issues, but it is part of a cleanup that I think would make the overall article better. --MASEM 17:32, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete By the time "HECU weapons and equipment" is cut away (rightfully), we're left with details which belong in individual game articles and original research. The reception info is about gameplay on the whole, a few scraps relating to the marines' AI doesn't necessitate or sustain an article. Fails WP:N due to not being the subject of multiple in-depth sources. Had a quick look for sources but nothing promising turned up. Someone another 03:50, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, then redirect article name to
Half-Life series: unless someone can provide evidence of significant notability to this AFD discussion, the article should be deleted. The subject may well have a couple of sentences in reviews here and there, but this does not extend past AI behaviour, which is better contained as reception in the main game articles - especially considering the Opposing Force article is devoid of any of this information anyway. -- Sabre (talk) 13:25, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Comment: Just a quick note, the subject has not actually appeared in four video games. Its appeared in one video game and its three expansion packs. That's a bit different than being spread over separate sequels. -- Sabre (talk) 13:43, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - or more of a request - append content to Talk:Half-Life (series)/merge and I'll look at generating a compact & referenced article for all Half-Life creatures, as it would probably be a better approach.Gazimoff (talk) 16:15, 14 March 2008 (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.