Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Creatures of Half-Life

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 was redirect to Half-Life (series). Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:29, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Creatures of Half-Life[edit]

Creatures of Half-Life (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I took a hard look at the article, and essentially, everything other than what already has their own articles (like Vortigaunts, etc.) is just non-notable or primary sourced. Nothing has changed since my last nomination nearly a decade ago in terms of adding sources. No secondary sources for these creatures - it just refers to the game's strategy guides, which is fine for a fan wiki but not Wikipedia. Doesn't live up to current Wikipedia standards. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 19:51, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not a huge number, admittedly; still, perhaps more mentions can be found with more digging. Centibyte(talk) 23:07, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Only problem is that pretty much all of those articles are about the game's design, rather than the enemy's design or its background. The author doesn't say, for example, that the Tentacle is a cool looking and memorable enemy, just that the level is cool for featuring the Tentacle in that way. Those kind of tangential mentions don't indicate an article-worthy degree of notability, in my opinion.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 00:04, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 08:04, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 08:11, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 08:11, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 08:11, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Totally on the fence, sorry. This list seems like it borders on WP:FANCRUFT. However, there are articles that would be considered subsections of this one such as Vortigaunt which are considered WP:GA. Information on creatures in this series clearly exists due to the fact there are whole articles dedicated to certain parts that have become standalone.
I will also argue that the WP:ITEXISTS argument should be completely ignored. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:32, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to game or franchise article with a talk-page nudge for interested editors to shift over any meaningful, cited commentary on e.g. the creatures' creation, development, etc. --EEMIV (talk) 11:23, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Half-Life series. Large sections of the article remain unsourced, and there is not enough secondary sourcing out there to salvage it. The creatures notable enough for their own articles have them, and that is sufficient here. If it turns out to be the case for other creatures, then their articles can be made, but this article specifically tip-toes just a little too much into WP:FANCRUFT. ZettaComposer (talk) 12:35, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect per above. What few elements of Half-Life either have their own article or are covered in Characters of Half-Life (which has sourcing issues but pretty sure that can be improved). Monsters in a video game edges on game guide material. --Masem (t) 14:44, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect per WP:GAMECRUFT. Also, hard disagree on the notion of there being a precedent for having poorly sourced lists. That's not true. They may exist, but they shouldn't. Sergecross73 msg me 18:08, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Perhaps I should go with the flow and vote "redirect", but I simply can't imagine "Creatures of Half-Life" being used as a search term for anyone who isn't looking for the specific content that this article covers, nor do I think there is any chance that this subject could ever be used as the basis for a viable article. List of fictional elements articles should be reserved for those very few franchises where such minutia is genuinely of interest to the general public, rather than just the hardcore fan base.--Martin IIIa (talk) 16:29, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect or Transwiki to a relevant Wikia - I actually share a lot of agreement with Martin IIIa's delete vote above, and I can't imagine it being a search term, either. However, while I highly doubt it, some day this might shape out to be more notable if more Half-Life titles are ever released, or it may prove important to a Wikia about the game series. Doing a redirect would preserve that page history for the public should one decide to use or build on the extensive past work here. There would be much more work needed to make it work here, notability notwithstanding, but it couldn't hurt to at least save the past revisions. Red Phoenix talk 00:20, 2 March 2018 (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/Creatures_of_Half-Life&oldid=1069068142"