Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zones of EverQuest (2nd nomination)

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. Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 23:38, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Zones of EverQuest

Ever since the previous AfD, only two sources have been added. Despite the three months allotted, ever since the previous AfD was closed, all attempts at fixing the issues presented in the previous AfD has been dropped, suggesting that editors are only willing to fix it when the article undergoes an AfD. Alongside this the article still remains unnotable gamecruft likely to attract original research.

There are only two sources on this article, one coming from a fansite about the topic and another comes from a third party source in which hardly mentions the subject of this article, as suggested as that source is footnoted to merely two lines.

With such lack of third party sources, it is still assumable that the topic and article is unnotable to non-EverQuest players and the real world.

This article, as before, still contains a large number of gamecruft that is only likely to attract original research, something unwelcome to Wikipedia.

This article reads like both a list of game locations and a game guide, both of which are what Wikipedia is not.

With these same issues since the previous AfD and the lack of attempts to fixing them after the end of the previous AfD suggests that editors are most likely not willing to place such improvements onto this article. IAmSasori (talk) 18:01, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Insufficient coverage for WP:N, and anyway Wikipedia is not a game guide. Percy Snoodle (talk) 14:47, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Wikipedia ain't a game guide. Judgesurreal777 (talk)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related-related deletion discussions. —Percy Snoodle (talk) 14:47, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. Someone another 15:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - An excuse to put more gamecruft in. User:Krator (t c) 22:37, 13 February 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.