Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Competitive online roleplaying game
From 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. Basically a recreation of CORPG. Phrasing is slightly different, but the references are the same. There is nothing really here to merge either. IronGargoyle 00:26, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Competitive online roleplaying game
"CORPG" is a term invented by ArenaNet, the publishers of the game Guild Wars, to distinguish their game from MMORPGs. So far this term has not caught on in the industry. For a brief moment the game Fury was called a CORPG, but it was later changed to PvPRPG. I claim, therefore, that this is not a notable video game genre name because it has not been used by multiple independent third parties. The article on Guild Wars already mentions the genesis of the term and no individual article, that can never grow longer than stub length, is needed. Eric Sandholm 02:23, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Connell66 07:50, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
- Delete as recreated This page is basically a recreated version of the previously delted and redirected article CCORPG. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CORPG for the previous discussion. Delete and restore the prior redirect. Dugwiki 17:56, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
- To clarify, the situation prior to the present article's creation was: CORPG→Guild Wars and a redlink for competitive online roleplaying game. Eric Sandholm
- Deleting it as a re-creation does not apply since the content itself is not a fork. (I never even knew an older version had existed...ironically, the fact that two Wikipedians independently created the same article is an argument in favor of the article in my opinion, although I may not be able to cite a policy beyond WP:IAR to support my contention.) Tarinth 15:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per WP:CSD#G4, also WP:NEO and WP:N. Carlosguitar 20:32, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep - I wasn't even aware that a previous article had been made, so my apologies if it is a re-creation of a previously created topic. I believe it's adequately referenced for a stub. The reason I created the article was because CORPG appeared to be a redirect to Guild Wars, which appeared to be inaccurate (the two terms are not synonymous). As shown in the reference cited, CORPG is used by outside media to categorize the genre (I'd suggest that what the companies dub themselves is somewhat less important). If it is decided that the article be deleted, I suggest completely deleting it (rather than maintaining a redirect) since I think it would cause more confusion than anything. Tarinth 15:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
-
- Just to clarify, the previous redirect was because the term CORPG was already described in the Guild Wars article, and Guild Wars is frankly the primary source for the term. So people who might search for the term were redirected to that article. The article itself was deleted because of a lack of evidence that the term itself has any actual notability outside of being a marketing. I didn't notice any new citations in the current article that weren't in the previous incarnation, and so it doesn't look like that situation has changed. Dugwiki 16:12, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- My guess is that the citation to a July 2007 article is new since the last article was deleted. Tarinth 16:13, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- I can't verify the citation you're talking about from here. But as a heads up if it's a blog it normally wouldn't be considered a reliable publisher.
- My guess is that the citation to a July 2007 article is new since the last article was deleted. Tarinth 16:13, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- Just to clarify, the previous redirect was because the term CORPG was already described in the Guild Wars article, and Guild Wars is frankly the primary source for the term. So people who might search for the term were redirected to that article. The article itself was deleted because of a lack of evidence that the term itself has any actual notability outside of being a marketing. I didn't notice any new citations in the current article that weren't in the previous incarnation, and so it doesn't look like that situation has changed. Dugwiki 16:12, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep- The fact alone that in article in many media was written about his is proof enough gamers considered this a valid term. Two games already fit this genre. There are sources, and thus it seems valid enough per wikipedia's article standards.--149.150.236.15 01:48, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
- Which "many media" are you referring to? There are only two citations in the article, one of which is the Guild Wars website which isn't an independent source and the other of which sounds like a blog (which wouldn't be a reliable publisher). Can you provide any reliable independent publishers talking about the term? Dugwiki 14:38, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
- How would you define blog? The editorial guidelines on the source state "We publish peer-reviewed articles on subjects ranging from the economics and content of online games, to speculative non-fiction by noted science fiction authors and futurists, as well as interviews and analysis of top guilds and clans." Tarinth 17:50, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
- Which "many media" are you referring to? There are only two citations in the article, one of which is the Guild Wars website which isn't an independent source and the other of which sounds like a blog (which wouldn't be a reliable publisher). Can you provide any reliable independent publishers talking about the term? Dugwiki 14:38, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. Carlosguitar 00:34, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
- Delete as buzzword with no relevance outside of Guild Wars. From the Arenanet citation: "Rather than labeling Guild Wars an MMORPG, we prefer to call it a CORPG (Competitive Online Role-Playing Game)." It's marketing speech. With a population of about 1.5, this 'genre' can be summed up within one or two sentences in the Guild Wars article with a single citation. QuagmireDog 03:59, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
- Delete - It is destined to remain stub. --Storm Rider (talk) 06:44, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep, media coverage of guildwars have picked up on their usage of the term. Thus it has clearly been valid enough for them to use and not automatically reject out of hand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathmo (talk • contribs)
- Strong Merge into Guild Wars. Term is only notable in connection with Guild Wars, cannot be expanded beyond a stub, but is well written and referenced. Seems like a classic case for a merge here. --User:Krator (t c) 10:56, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
- In the event of a merge, are you proposing that other games that are now being associated with the term be given coverage within the Guild Wars article? Tarinth 11:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
- There are no other games that self-identify as CORPG. The gaming press--at least the established major sites--mention rather than use CORPG only in relation to Guild Wars. There is nothing else to cover besides what is already in the Guild Wars article. No merge is needed as there is nothing to merge. Eric Sandholm 12:38, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
- In the event of a merge, are you proposing that other games that are now being associated with the term be given coverage within the Guild Wars article? Tarinth 11:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
- 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.
