Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mining (RuneScape)

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. Deathphoenix ʕ 20:34, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mining (RuneScape)[edit]

I don't think that an individual skill in an online game needs its own article. We already have one on the RuneScape wiki. --Ixfd64 21:15, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - fandom-specific articles always have a hard time here, and this one doesn't make the cut. Tevildo 21:42, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom--Nick Y. 23:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fancruft. --Mr. Le fty _{Talk to me!} 23:47, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. AgentPeppermint 02:44, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is one of the better of the RuneScape articles. Although the vandals keep trying to put the game guide information back in, it is watched constantly and kept to a NPOV and non-game guide level most of the time. Mining is a very significant skill in the game. There are several RuneScape articles that may be redundant or unnecessary (i.e. the articles on specific monsters), but this one deserves to be kept, IMO. Xela Yrag 08:51, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I looked through the history, and I couldn't find a single version of this article that wasn't a game guide. This is of interest only to RS players, and of use only to RS players. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 08:55, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - "only of interest / use to 'X'" - the same can be said of articles on almost any topic. I'd say it falls far short of being a guide, though at the permitted level of detail, short of being useful. Ace of Risk 13:43, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This skill is already mentioned at RuneScape skills. If anything in this article is worth merging there I'm all for it. Otherwise, just redirect since I don't think we need separate articles on all the different skills. Sjakkalle (Check!) 14:37, 26 June 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.