Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DungeonDoom (computer game)

Add links
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 of the debate was delete. Thanks to Hellborg for rewriting it, but unfortunately the consensus here is that the mod isn't notable enough to merit an article in an encyclopaedia, no matter how well-written. --Sam Blanning(talk) 14:08, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DungeonDoom (computer game)

[edit]
  ATTENTION!

If you came to this page because a friend asked you to do so, or because you saw a message on an online forum asking you to do so, please note that the deletion process is designed to determine the consensus of opinion of Wikipedia editors; for this reason comments from users whose histories do not show experience with or contributions to Wikipedia, and particularly, to this article, are traditionally given less weight and may be discounted entirely by the closing Administrator.

You are not barred from participating in the discussion, or making your opinion known here, no matter how new you may be: we welcome reasoned opinions and rational discussion based upon our policies and guidelines. However, ballot stuffing is pointless. There is no ballot to stuff, because this is not a vote. Please review Wikipedia:Deletion policy for more information.

Please sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Happy editing!


Was proded, author requested it to be restored, thus in some sense, a contested prod. -- Drini 01:10, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete The article doesn't assert why it's any more notable than any other mod. In addition, parts of it read like an ad (which could be fixed- the subject of the article is insignificant either way). -- Kicking222 01:36, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Kicking222. DarthVader 01:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do not Delete I do not see why this article violates any of the four policies that would justify deletion. This article has a Neutral point of view, it's Verifiabile, it's contents is derived from real world, readliy available (linked in external links) information and thus "No original research" and it does not violate any copyright. The article points out what is special about this mod and although the subject might be insignificant to many, it might be interesting to anybody who either likes the Doom3 game or roguelike games. The mod has been reviewed in many popular computer game magazines including PC Gamer and Computer Gaming World. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.137.31.7 (talk • contribs) .
  • Delete per Kicking222. Paddles 04:03, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or merge to Doom3. Zaxem 05:52, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, WP:VSCA. The anon does not understand the NPOV policy, as this is essentially WP:SPAM, with most of the article taken up by a "Features" section that looks like it came off the back of a game box. Needs a stronger statement of notability to me. Morgan Wick 06:15, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Kicking222. --Arnzy (whats up?) 06:54, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. DakpowersTalk 07:55, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, it's just an advert for a mod. --Nydas 08:58, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • You guys do whatever you think is best for you! I see what you mean and yes, this article does not change the world and frankly it appears to me that all of you spend too much time considering a deletion. As someone asked for it, these are some excerpts from reviews on this mod: PC Gamer(US) April 2006 (also in UK version Feb 2006): Cross Carmack's Programming brilliance with a tried-and-tested game formula and you get genius. - GameStar(Germany) March 2006: translated: The search for magical weapons and items continuosly drives virtual hunters and collectors though role-playing games since years. Up till now, FPS fans had to live without such addictive supplements. DungeonDoom puts an end to this: The mod transforms Doom3 into an Ego-Diablo. PC Zone(UK) Feb 2006: ...it's strangely addictive once you get past the initial difficulty hurdle... Computer Gaming World Feb 2006 (2.5 of 5 stars): ...it's a frenzied meat grind from top to bottom... PC Action (Germany) Doom3 Special 2005: translated: Diablo 2 as a First Person Shooter? DUNGEON DOOM makes this dream reality. - so, yes, delete it if it makes you guys happy! Hellborg 09:39, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I Object to this AfD Drini, his objection to prod was four days late! The proper thing to do is not to subject undisputed deletions to recreation, and thereby undermine the prod process - it is to take it to WP:DRV, where it's manifestly harder to get something undeleted. It's designed that way for a reason, and should not be tampered with. My vote is, uh, Endorse Deletion. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 12:14, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, non-notable game mod. JIP | Talk 14:15, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, gamecruft. --Terence Ong 15:11, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Have fun deleting - Please do me a favor and also delete the other 60 game mod articles. I don't see any reason why these should be any more or less notable that this article. Hellborg 20:34, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • DO NOT Delete - As stated, it's not as if there are not other mod articles. What sets Dungeon Doom apart is the fact that it was one of the most quickly built and most innovative mods yet, and it is fact that many other developers use this mod as a referance for getting certain aspects in their own mods. Joe_Quaker 11:05am EST, 22 May 2006
  • Keep. While this article is a mess, it is quite a notable subject. I would encourage interested parties to edit and expand the article, then see if you can get some people to change their votes. Go to WP:CVG and check out styles and infobox for Computer and Video Game articles. Aguerriero (talk) 17:22, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and probably merge into Doom3. It passes the Wikipedia:google test with flying colours, it's been reviewed in the press, it's played by a whole bunch of people - in short, it's notable. Yes, it needs fixing, and it might need merging, but it doesn't need deleting. --Hughcharlesparker 18:36, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge into Doom3 somehow. The content is useful. Create a section called DungeonDoom mod. Bye --Starionwolf 03:08, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article Rewrite According to the suggestions made in this discussion, I rewrote the article based on the suggestions detailed in the "WikiProject Computer and video games" guidelines. Hellborg 08:57, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom.--Peta 06:24, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Hellborg and Hughcharlesparker or Merge into Doom3. The content about this notable free game mod should not be deleted.—204.42.17.67 12:53, 25 May 2006 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/DungeonDoom_(computer_game)&oldid=1137806631"