Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of gadgets in the Spy Fox series

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. postdlf (talk) 20:00, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of gadgets in the Spy Fox series

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

In-universe, unsourced fancruft. The "gadgets" are gameplay elements with no out-of-universe notability, and the "locations" likewise. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 11:32, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merge back to parent article where it and its content (except for any analysis/intepretation per
WP:TOOLONG. VMS Mosaic (talk) 08:31, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Okay, how about "could find no sourcing that wasn't the game proper", "no out-of-universe notability asserted"? Or do those just not count anywhere in your little alphabet soup here? Ten Pound Hammer • ⁽What did I screw up now?) 02:13, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The alphabet soup is in support of
WP:FICT, ... VMS Mosaic (talk) 03:37, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This debate has been included in the [Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Deletion|list of video game-related deletion discussions]]. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 16:20, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:20, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:20, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Unreferenced, no indication of notability of any of the individual list entries, and notability is not inherited. Per
WP:LISTN no evidence that this content has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, so no evidence of other notability. In addition, the content is in large part how-to/original research.Dialectric (talk) 03:10, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Please see my response above. I believe it responds to your issues. See particularly
WP:FICTIONPLOT. I agree that there could be some "interpretation" here, but without buying and playing the game, I don't know if stuff like "The ultimate gadget" is something stated in the game (i.e., "it is verifiable by a reasonable, educated person without specialist knowledge" who plays the game) or the writer's "interpretation". VMS Mosaic (talk) 04:11, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete The idea that we can have a non-notable list of non-notable entries simply flies against the spirit of our guidelines even if some of them haven't been thought through thoroughly enough.
talk) 21:55, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Given that these three lists (one is in a separate AfD) were probably broken out of the

WP:N main article, just as I wouldn't claim a list of seasons and sub lists of episodes of a TV series be allowed without a main article on that TV series. VMS Mosaic (talk) 03:22, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete.
WP:LISTN is not satisfied here. There need to be sources that discuss the concept as a whole. However, this is completely unreferenced plot details. Just because it exists does not mean that Wikipedia should catalog it. If the main article is too long, then non-notable, unsourced information can be simply deleted. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:49, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

WP:TOOLONG clearly states "Content should not be removed from articles simply to reduce length; see Wikipedia:Content removal#Reasons for acceptable reasons." VMS Mosaic (talk) 07:55, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete because it isn't really a list. Any notable items can be merged back into the main article, which can be trimmed if it is too long. - Pointillist (talk) 09:55, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both. (Has even less coverage than the
♔ 15:52, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Quoting from

WP:CSC #2 explicitly permits lists where all items have zero notability. VMS Mosaic (talk) 08:31, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete Pretty easily per
WP:NOT and WP:LIST. VMS Mosaic's keep rationale is wholly unconvincing. Them From Space 19:00, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Okay, I do realize that keeping this as a separate article from its parent article was a long shot, but it was pointed out to me elsewhere that merging an article back to its parent after it has been extensively changed is a somewhat difficult process due to the required history merge and/or editor attribution (difficult to me at least), plus it would have been in the spirit of

WP:TOOLONG. Merge now looks like the only option (other than restoring the list to the article as it existed 6.5 years ago prior to the split.) VMS Mosaic (talk) 08:31, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete both as not passing
WP:WAF more than anything with no real-world context, rather just in-game cruft. As an editorial decision, I don't see anything to merge--readers don't need such detail to understand the game in question, and a couple paragraphs of quality prose would suffice. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 14:44, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

It appears video games are treated differently from other fictional universes (i.e., books, manga, films, etc.) per

WP:FICTIONPLOT. VMS Mosaic (talk) 00:30, 24 December 2013 (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.