Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Masamune (video game weapon)

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 keep (by default) -- there is significant support for either keep or merge, but not enough for either to clearly choose keep or merge. Those arguing against merging and those arguing for merging have good points and what will be done needs further discussion. Mangojuicetalk 18:34, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Masamune (video game weapon)

Masamune (video game weapon) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

This article was probably unnecessarily split from Masamune#Masamune in Pop Culture. It also manages to copy, almost verbatim, text from Masa and Mune, List of Final Fantasy weapons#Masamune and Masamune#Masamune in Pop Culture while at the same time being completely WP:OR and unverifiable (except by primary sources and fan sites). Delete as WP:NOT#IINFO and possible WP:POVFORK. Axem Titanium 00:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Note Multiple accounts who contributed to this AfD are suspected sockpuppets per Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Infomanager. ~ trialsanderrors 07:25, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep I like this organization better than merging the video-game Masamune weapons back into the article on swordmaker Masamune; that clutters an article about history with useless gamecruft. I also like this organization better than splitting Masamune mentions across the pages for each video game; this illustrates the connection between them better. In my opinion, the split from Masamune#Masamune in Pop Culture was appropriate. --Hyperbole 00:19, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. We don't need gamecruft in a history article, and something known widely in the gaming community shouldn't be sprinkled across several pages. This is much better organization than several sprinkled bits over several pages. TRKtvtce 01:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per above discussion. --Dennisthe2 03:21, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete -- This article fails W:N. I suspect most other video game weapons will fail it as well.Librarylefty 03:44, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
    • I'm assuming you mean WP:N since a letter can't be criteria. --Wafulz 04:24, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete for being non-notable. A weapon from a computer/video game might be notable within that game, but not outside. If any information could be merged with an article about the relevant games, fine, but a fictional weapon should not have it's own article. Bjelleklang - talk 07:15, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
The problem is that this isn't a weapon from a game, it's a weapon from several games. I'm neutral though, because I haven't decided if it's fancruft or not. It could also use more citing. -Ryanbomber 12:31, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep or Merge back. Deserves to be covered somewhere, no strong opinion on whether it needs its own article or not. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:01, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge back to original article. Orderinchaos78 16:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep as an acceptable fork per Hyperbole and TrackerTV, if its a copy and the copy didn't have NPOV issues before, I don't see how it has it now. hateless 18:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge - This doesn't need more than a section in the Masamune article. The information should, of course, be heavily trimmed. Wickethewok 19:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. It is a reoccuring element across many of Square's games (and also many other games by other companies), and therefore its popular usage must be noted in at least one gaming magazine. However, it should have a brief overview in the Masaume in Popular Culture article that links to it. But merging it back into the article is fine with me too. Blueaster 19:45, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Somewhere Between Merge back and Keep. Andrew Lenahan says it all for me. Just H 20:16, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. PresN 20:21, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge per Wickethewok. I think I've done most of the necessary trimming. (NB: This meant dropping a lot of info from the article but didn't mean cutting anything significant from Wikipedia as a whole, since everything I cut could also be found in the respective game articles.) NeonMerlin 21:06, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • DO NOT MERGE/Delete or Redirect As much as I agree with the non-notability of this subject I also agree with the organizational argument and I think the worst choice is to merge non-notable gamecruft back into an excellent history article. I would suggest converting this page to a disambiguation page or a category with links to all of the videos games that use the weapon which is not too far from wha it is now. With that said there is little reason not to outright delete as non-notable.--Nick Y. 21:25, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep or Split and Merge The Masamune may or may not be a big deal outside of the gaming community, but inside the vast majority of the population it is a big name. I would recommend, rather than outright DELETNG the article, all the data for the FF section be moved to the appropriate page, and all the data for the Chrono Trigger section be moved to either the Frog page or the Masa & Mune page. Chimeraman2 23:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I'm sort of stumped about what to do with this. I guess I'd go with split and merge for various pieces of the article, where appropriate: a very short blurb in the historical article, and mentions in the individual game articles. --Alan Au 06:03, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete as non-notable. The pop-culture section in the Masamune article is as informative as the entire article - this is basically a list of video games that contain a weapon named Masamune. —Xenoveritas 07:11, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - I've complete Chrono Trigger (who hasn't?), and yet this is adequately covered in the Masa and Mune article. There's absolutely no need for a separate article chronicling where the name has popped up. There's absolutely no space for this subtrivial crap at the main Masamune article whatsoever, other than a one line mention and link to the two games. The votes of "merge back" are ridiculous, why the heck would anyone researching Masamune, give a shit that Sodom, stage 2 boss of Final Fight wield two swords labelled Masa and Mune?! - hahnchen 19:01, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge back unto where it came FirefoxMan 20:16, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep or Merge per Hyperbole and tracker. Alan Shatte 21:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC) ← See checkuser request on this user. Crossmr 23:29, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. This isn't nearly noteworthy enough to merit it's own article; you might as well post up Japanese-gaming stereotypes up, as well. This should remain a small section inside of the swordsmith Masamune article. BishopTutu 04:45, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep or merge per Alan and others. Paul D. Meehan 05:25, 5 January 2007 (UTC) ← See checkuser request on this user. Crossmr 23:29, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep or merge per discussion above. Brad Guzman 20:12, 5 January 2007 (UTC) ← See checkuser request on this user. Crossmr 23:29, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep This article explains what others do not and people may only be interested in this certain aspect of the idea.

User:Iammeheremeroar 12:36, 8 January 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.