Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Playstation 2 internal display clock
- 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. No sources, no dice.Cúchullain t/c 22:20, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Playstation 2 internal display clock (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Subject does not seem to comply with the notability guideline, and cites no published sources whatsoever, failing to meet verifiability policy and probably also "no original research" policy. Dancter 19:23, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete or merge to PlayStation 2 this is totally unotable, wikipedia is not a collection of indescriminate information. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 19:32, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. Dancter 19:26, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Dancter 19:26, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I never thought I'd hear (well, read, I guess) myself saying this about a video game clock, but ... original research? The really amazing part is that somebody actually timed these things out. Delete. - Che Nuevara 20:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I fail to see how this does not meet the Verifiability policy. Anyone can flick on a PS2 and obviously "verify" what has been written in the article. Do you need some professional editor or author to publish something in order to tell you that? You also can't assume "original research" as this article can be based on casual observation. So it becomes indescriminate just because no one else decided to take the time to write about it? That doesn't make it unotable. You're saying in theory, an editor from some random gaming site could publish an article about the clock, or some random person from GameFAQ could list the specifics in their FAQs and all of a sudden it makes it "verifiable?" Someone at Sony obviously designed the internal software of the PS2 with the hopes that someone would notice. I have received messages from several people complimenting my article because they found something new in the system software to observe. It seems the group who doesn't like it automatically gets a "Delete this crap" attitude. Kinda lame if you ask me... Keep Kinless 05:55, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Do you need some professional editor or author to publish something in order to tell you that? - Yes, please see our WP:Verifiability policy. Marasmusine 13:12, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to PlayStation 2 if we can find a reliable reference. But if we can't find any, delete as this article has no references and it is not notable. Cool200 01:39, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge I can't believe that this article was made. Not notable at all. Cannot be verified...I think. Indiscriminate. Ashnard Talk Contribs 17:44, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Most of the general info in the article can be verified by just turning the ps2 on, however when it comes to the finer details that border on obsessive I dont think they are needed. Perhaps since it is about half completed why not rename the article to Ps2 operating system and add the relevant info for a decent article.Atirage 13:35, 18 October 2007 (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.