Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Molten core

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 of the snowball variety. Marasmusine (talk) 13:37, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Molten core

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable dungeon within a game. Was proposed for deletion, but was contested with rationale: "(removed tag. I can show you 100 videos of molten core raids. It was the highest dungeon at one point (notability does not expire) and if the fictional sacred heart hospital from tv show scrubs is acceptable for an article.. this is.)"

The "videos" refer to youtube videos and the like, which do not grant notability. The argument of "all or nothing" is similarly not convincing.

Has been tagged for merge some time ago, but no discussions have taken place, and there is no content to actually merge as it is not relevant to the topic, nor notable enough to add to the target article about it. Taelus (talk) 18:13, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. (Search video game sources) Taelus (talk) 18:17, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Interested parties notified: The page creator, contestor of the proposed deletion, and editors of the merge target at Talk:World of Warcraft have been informed of this listing. --Taelus (talk) 18:22, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Relevant past AfD discussion can be found here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deadmines. A page on the same topic was deleted, although under a different capitalisation. Hope this helps, --Taelus (talk) 18:24, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment To butcher an old saying if we're not going to do something right, it's not worth doing at all. If we were to have this page it should be comprehensive. If there's no desire to have that here (as I expect) I'm not sure there's any value in a stub.--Cube lurker (talk) 18:50, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to World of Warcraft. Redirects are cheap, and its a reasonably plausible search term. Oh, and nerf rogues. Umbralcorax (talk) 19:16, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Personally I would be against redirecting here, as it is not mentioned in the target article. I have nominated several redirects similar to what this would become if this were the outcome here: Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2010_April_26#Black_Temple, so please do leave your opinion. Whilst I agree with redirects being cheap, I don't like the way that some articles are "deleted by redirecting", especially when targets have no relevant detail and never will do. It's just misleading readers into thinking we have content that we don't per the notability policy. --Taelus (talk) 21:34, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Snow delete. Oh, come on, WoW instances is beyond WP:FANCRUFT. To previous comment on "sacred heart hospital" or in general WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not an argument for keeping this. I don't see Naxx or ICC having an article. The best Warcraft universe currently deserves is an article on its locations. There is WoWWiki for this. And calling MC notable because it was end-game at 60 is close to calling Aesir Corporation notable because that's the end-game of Max Payne. — Hellknowz ▎talk 19:20, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above, absolutely no secondary sources. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 19:38, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Do not redirect as the term is not mentioned in the WoW article. Glenfarclas (talk) 20:37, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This article has the kind of info for WoWWiki or some other WoW-specific site that helps gamers, not something appropriate for Wikipedia. The content isn't appropriate to include in the WoW article, so I don't recommend a merge, and a redirect would be confusing since there's no info on Molten Core in the main article (nor should there be). -- Atama頭 22:16, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Snow Delete - WP:GAMECRUFT in its purest form. Let it snow so we can move on. --Teancum (talk) 13:37, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Snow Delete obvious WP:GAMECRUFT, please delete this immediately, it's already snowy. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 13:53, 29 April 2010 (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.