Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
→Talk:Super Smash Bros. Brawl/FAQ: comment |
||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
*'''Delete''' - Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an FAQ.--[[User:WaltCip|WaltCip]] ([[User talk:WaltCip|talk]]) 13:47, 10 January 2008 (UTC) |
*'''Delete''' - Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an FAQ.--[[User:WaltCip|WaltCip]] ([[User talk:WaltCip|talk]]) 13:47, 10 January 2008 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' - I do agree that there is quite a bit of [[WP:GAMEGUIDE|gameguide-ish]] info that should be pruned out, but the FAQ serves a very important purpose along preventing vandalism. It also boggles me how so many people want to Delete the page based on its encyclopedic notability when it's clearly a subsection to a Talk page, which has nothing to do with its encyclopedic content. [[User:Arrowned|Arrowned]] ([[User talk:Arrowned|talk]]) 16:37, 10 January 2008 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''' - I do agree that there is quite a bit of [[WP:GAMEGUIDE|gameguide-ish]] info that should be pruned out, but the FAQ serves a very important purpose along preventing vandalism. It also boggles me how so many people want to Delete the page based on its encyclopedic notability when it's clearly a subsection to a Talk page, which has nothing to do with its encyclopedic content. [[User:Arrowned|Arrowned]] ([[User talk:Arrowned|talk]]) 16:37, 10 January 2008 (UTC) |
||
:'''Comment'''. It's an un-needed subpage. Why exactly do we need a massive guide to almost every detail on the game? I think it's a bit wrong to assume people will repetitively ask those questions. Let's not crystal ball here and let's not assume most people are ignorant to the article and talk page. The majority of people aren't coming to only Wikipedia to get all their Brawl news. While this FAQ was made in good intentions, it's not necessary. Also, it being a subsection of a talk page doesn't justify it should be kept. Wikipedia isn't a FAQ site, and never should be one. I think people are assuming bad faith here, by thinking people are going to be vandals without the FAQ. Most vandals don't even read talk pages, so using it as a way to protect against vandalism isn't a reliable reason to keep it either. [[User:RobJ1981|RobJ1981]] ([[User talk:RobJ1981|talk]]) 22:30, 10 January 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 22:30, 10 January 2008
Talk:Super Smash Bros. Brawl/FAQ
I would like to not that this page is quite inappropriate for Wikipedia as it contains social network like information that will be more appropriate on Gamespot. I would like to note that this page was originally created back in 2006 to prevent stupid questions from appearing. However Brawl is set out in a few weeks and this will not be necessary. Marlith T/C 05:39, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- Although many articles have FAQ sections with details relating to what can be included in the article and what cannot, but this one goes too off-topic, making it sound like a game guide rather than its intended purpose. I can't see much of a use for this page. Spebi 05:42, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- Delete I believe it also counts as copyvio, nor does the article exist, and we are not a FAQ. —BoL 05:47, 10 January 2008 (UTC) Disclaimer
- Delete. This type of thing isn't appropriate for Wikipedia. The same questions wont just pop up many times (there is some exceptions, but usually it's new editors that don't always have a clear understanding of what the talk page is for). A good percent of the editors know what talk pages are for. Also, this FAQ subpage is a game guide and not suitable for listing, period. RobJ1981 (talk) 05:50, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- It isn't a game guide. I see nothing about how to play the game anywhere in it. It's a list of things about the article, its content, the application of Wikipedia policies, and the sources that are apparently frequently discussed on the article's talk page. And new editors that go to the article's talk page are pointed to it by a big coloured banner at the top of that talk page. I see from the talk page that one of the subjects addressed by the FAQ came up for discussion on the talk page again just a week ago. Uncle G (talk) 10:50, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- Keep it's obviously about writing the article, not playing the game. The questions are the types of questions that people ask on the talk page or information they try to put in the article. If you don't like certain points delete them or reword them, but MFD is not for cleanup. As for the game being released soon, if it's no longer relevant then, you can nominate it them. I fail to see the point in preemptive deletion. - Koweja (talk) 05:53, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Not really Wikipedia material. — $PЯINGεrαgђ 06:01 10 January, 2008 (UTC)
- Keep as a legitimate use of the talk namespace to help maintain the article. There are 24 archives; few people are going to look into them to see if their question has been answered. After the game is released, there will reasonably still be new editors trying to add unencyclopedic information, and this FAQ serves to avoid some of that. If there is any game guide stuff, get rid of it so long as it does not pertain to improving the article in any way. –Pomte 11:51, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- Keep as per Pomte. If there is any objectionable content in the FAQ, it should be removed, but its basic principle (a page to provide answers to commonly asked questions) is still valid. As Marlith noted, when Brawl is released, the FAQ may not be necessary; for now it should stay, because it serves a purpose. Ourai тʃс 13:09, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- Delete - Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an FAQ.--WaltCip (talk) 13:47, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - I do agree that there is quite a bit of gameguide-ish info that should be pruned out, but the FAQ serves a very important purpose along preventing vandalism. It also boggles me how so many people want to Delete the page based on its encyclopedic notability when it's clearly a subsection to a Talk page, which has nothing to do with its encyclopedic content. Arrowned (talk) 16:37, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- Comment. It's an un-needed subpage. Why exactly do we need a massive guide to almost every detail on the game? I think it's a bit wrong to assume people will repetitively ask those questions. Let's not crystal ball here and let's not assume most people are ignorant to the article and talk page. The majority of people aren't coming to only Wikipedia to get all their Brawl news. While this FAQ was made in good intentions, it's not necessary. Also, it being a subsection of a talk page doesn't justify it should be kept. Wikipedia isn't a FAQ site, and never should be one. I think people are assuming bad faith here, by thinking people are going to be vandals without the FAQ. Most vandals don't even read talk pages, so using it as a way to protect against vandalism isn't a reliable reason to keep it either. RobJ1981 (talk) 22:30, 10 January 2008 (UTC)