Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zero-Point Energy Field Manipulator

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 keep. --- RockMFR 23:24, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zero-Point Energy Field Manipulator[edit]

In-universe, crufty and unsourced article on a non-notable fictional weapon. MER-C 10:00, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unsourced gameguide. AnteaterZot (talk) 10:47, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. Someone another (talk) 21:53, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am pulling shitloads of good sources from google by searching for "gravity gun", take a look at these: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]. That's just some of the potential sources, and those releated to Half Life 2. Apparently a gravity gun is given to the player early in a Doom 3 expansion pack (news to me, I've never played it). There's also going to be discussion about how the gravity gun interacts with modern FPS physic engines etc. Do we have these details elsewhere? It sure as heck looks like a suitable topic to me. Someone another (talk) 22:14, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Further comment this review is one of probably umpteen which ties the Doom 3 expansion pack's version in with the half life 2 version. Not only do we have the weapon used in more than one game, but they've also been tied together in a reliable source, we can link them without resorting to original research. But then again this GameSpy article has Doom 3's developers talking about how they had the gravity gun kicking around during development. There's no maybe about it, this is a full-blown topic which can be cited, if there's any development info about Half-Life 2's gravity gun out there this could make GA easily. Someone another (talk) 22:45, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Perhaps the only really notable fictional video game weapon out there. See above for a fraction of the sources. User:Krator (t c) 22:31, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this was a good-faith creation by a new contributor which hasn't been wikified. To a passing visitor it looks extremely crufty and one of any number of inappropriate, overly-detailed articles which get deleted all the time, so it's fair enough that it's at AFD. However, since this lump of coal has turned out to be a diamond, can I request the AFD to be withdrawn or closed? Unless that is there's another article about it lying around somewhere. Someone another (talk) 22:48, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
keep The article is bad, but there is plenty of real-world context for this one. It might make sense for this to be moved to gravity gun and generalized to include the Doom 3 weapon as well. — brighterorange (talk) 22:52, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~Good idea, support moving to Gravity gun.~~Someone another (talk) 09:49, 10 December 2007 (UTC) Gravity gun has been redirected to this article instead. Someone another (talk) 05:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Game weapons are not normally notable, but the Gravity Gun did cause a stir with reviewers. I have added some references from Edge magazine in accordance with WP:WAF. Marasmusine (talk) 14:59, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - Move to Gravity gun, draw in material from Doom 3 (and any other titles with similar weapons) and generally clean it up. While I agree with Krator about this being the only notable fictional videogame weapon, the article is way too crufty at present. --Plumbago (talk) 15:09, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. I was thinking a move to Gravity gun would be good, so that it could be an article about "gravity guns" in multiple game series. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 20:01, 17 December 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.