Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vital Suit

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 Lost Planet: Extreme Condition. redirect but article history itself deleted. Cirt (talk) 00:20, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vital Suit

This wad of purely in-universe plot material fails WP:N as it has not been covered in anything other than in-universe or gameguide terms in reliable secondary sources. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:13, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Wikipedia is not just a gameguide, this has not been covered under any reliable secondary sources. At best merge some of the information with the game's article. --Banime (talk) 16:08, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletions. MuZemike (talk) 18:00, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and Banime. VG ☎ 00:48, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect to Lost Planet They're the mechs in Lost Planet, the end. Anything more than explaining their role in the game is excessive fixation on a single aspect of the game. A quick search turns up nothing except a list of the suits themselves on IGN, no independent notability demonstrated, does not comply with WP:N or WP:VGSCOPE. Someone another 01:58, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect An ed. not previously connected with the article just truncated it, removing all of the really absurd detail--absurd even my the most flexible standards--unfortunately there isn't enough information left for an article. I can not immediately see how to do something intermediate. DGG (talk) 04:18, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a violation of WP:VGSCOPE. Wikipedia is the place for a WP:CONCISEPLOT, not detailed information about in-game items. Also a violation of WP:N for a lack of reliable third-party sources on this topic. Randomran (talk) 02:24, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per others. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 06:57, 23 September 2008 (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.