Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reject Rare Draft
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 Variant Magic: The Gathering formats. Mangojuicetalk 18:01, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A non-tournament-sanctioned, casual alternate play format for Magic: The Gathering. I have actually played it before, but it is simply too non-notable even within the game's fan base to have an article. Andrew Levine 04:55, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. If it's not even that notable among Magic play formats... Recury 14:56, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge and Redirect to either Mark Gottlieb or an article on Variant Magic Formats. FrozenPurpleCube 15:39, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I should point out that Gottlieb did not invent RRD; it was played for years at Neutral Ground in New York before he wrote about it (they were playing it there at least since 1999). Andrew Levine 17:26, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh, I know, however, he is the one who wrote about it, on the Wizards.com site and as such, brought it some noteriety, at least in reference to himself. It could also fit on the Magic:TG page in the section describing Draft events. FrozenPurpleCube 20:21, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I should point out that Gottlieb did not invent RRD; it was played for years at Neutral Ground in New York before he wrote about it (they were playing it there at least since 1999). Andrew Levine 17:26, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom Percy Snoodle 12:53, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment just giving folks a heads up that I added RRD to the Magic: The Gathering article in the Variants section. FrozenPurpleCube 22:46, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Looks like it's been removed for being too trivial. Andrew Levine 17:27, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, I see. I added it back, I don't concur with the grounds for removal. FrozenPurpleCube 14:43, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Looks like it's been removed for being too trivial. Andrew Levine 17:27, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to Variant Magic: The Gathering Formats as suggested by FrozenPurpleCube above. The current article is probably a little large for a niche format, but just as Magic storylines and Magic rules have split off and made their own article, perhaps a Variant formats article is also appropriate. Obviously, if moved, RRD would become a section, not the entire article. Such an article would probably need to be viligantly watched with "must have a cite before adding a format," but that's doable. Plus, that way the main article can simply have a link to Variant Magic Formats, and niche formats like RRD can be removed from it more easily. SnowFire 15:15, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok, I put together that article. Let's hope folks wait more than an hour before deleting it. :) FrozenPurpleCube 22:42, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Ehrm. For future reference, C&P moves are generally frowned upon, as they erase the contributor history required by the GFDL; moving the RRD article would probably have been better. Oh, well, not a huge deal. SnowFire 23:01, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The problem with that is that it would give far too much weight to a single format, and that just didn't sit right with me. But heck, the article probably needs a rewrite from the top anyway. With a whole article, we can do at least a paragraph on each notable format, not just a sentence. FrozenPurpleCube 00:57, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Ehrm. For future reference, C&P moves are generally frowned upon, as they erase the contributor history required by the GFDL; moving the RRD article would probably have been better. Oh, well, not a huge deal. SnowFire 23:01, 13 October 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.