Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of terms in Xenosaga (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 redirect to Xenosaga. WjBscribe 03:25, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of terms in Xenosaga[edit]

This was nominated and kept in January: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of terms in Xenosaga. False promises to cleanup were made: and never came through. The article is a huge mess 3 months later. In my opinion, 3 months is more than enough to at least do some cleanup. Little to none was done by the looks of the edit history/current state of the article. RobJ1981 03:54, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I do not see any mess. — Quin 05:11, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Transwiki~~ please. I don't think any false promises were given, it was worth a try. There hasn't been a lot of movement on the article, though, it's still devoid of citations and scarcely readable. The real problem with it, for me, is that it's completely impenetrable gabble - how is someone not intimately familiar with the series supposed to make any use of this? This list of terms needs a wikilinked glossary. There was a case for a stay of execution, and I'm glad it was taken up. But now that a reasonable period of time has passed I think it's equally important to cut away unsuitable material that isn't improving. Not doing so will just make it harder to convince the community to give other articles a chance. QuagmireDog 05:38, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Where to? Wikibooks doesn't take game guides anymore. Zetawoof_(ζ) 09:39, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Encyclopedia Gamia or Xenosaga Wikia. To be honest I've never so much as looked at wikibooks so it didn't enter my head. I think the information could be very useful in the right place but should be somewhere where it can continue to fill-out and expand. QuagmireDog 11:00, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - It was transwikied two months ago; see my comment below. — Deckill er 12:05, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Split somehow into separarte articles, or Keep. No mess I can see. Just a little large. —A • D ^Torque 08:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ (see below). per what Wikipedia is not, or at the very least Transwiki. The previous AfD is revealing - one editor of the article in the previous AfD stated: "don't rush to AfD articles if someone is planning on revamping the article(s) in question ... If, two months from now, the articles are in the same state ... a deletion may be best". EliminatorJR ^Talk 10:59, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I transwikied every section of every Xenosaga list, including this one, more than two months ago; I did not redirect the article because of all the fierce fanboys who would've reverted me, and I had far more important things to do across the project at the time. (Thus, I only got as far as redirecting the transwikied Xenogears cruft lists, which were more or less dead). Also, I find it insulting that one is telling me I've been giving "false promises". If my timetable doesn't satisfy yours, then that's just how things work. Wikipedia is not a place where people can use coercion to force editors to reorganize their priorities; it usually works better in certain workplaces, not a volunteer project. Besides, I had already fixed the problem two months ago by transwiking the article to a Xenosaga Wikia I created; the redirect was saved for a later point, perhaps this AfD, where I wouldn't have to open up another front in my already busy timetable at that time. The article needs to be redirected to preserve edit history per the GFDL (since it's been transwikied); therefore, I recommend closing this AfD early to led the redirect be placed sooner rather than later. — Deckill er 11:38, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect Per Deckiller. He's done the job of actually preserving the information in a more suitable place. That taken care of, there's little reason to keep an article that goes into levels of detail not required and which has scarcely progressed in more than three months. QuagmireDog 13:08, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect Per Deckiller, good work. EliminatorJR ^Talk 14:54, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This isnt' really encyclopaedic content... obviously a lot of work has gone into the article, however in the end Wikipedia isn't a place to catalogue a bunch of terms or concepts used in fiction. This really doesn't belong in an encyclopedia... perhaps a more suitable home could be found. /Blaxthos 16:06, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- We can't really delete the article because transwikied material needs to link to the history page of articles, which is preserved with redirects but removed with pure deletion. — Deckill er 21:58, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Deckiller's work on moving the content eslewhere. I'd suggest protecting the redirect per the fanboy revert concerns he brought up, though. NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 21:28, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Deckiller. Quadzilla99 22:17, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as per Deckiller. Darth griz⁹⁸ 22:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I wanted to know more about Xenosaga, and this article really helped me out. It's much more organized than the Xenosaga Wiki (and it has not even been transcluded there). Also, the Xenosaga Wiki does not even appear on Google. Rook 01:16, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it has, and the Xenosaga Wikia appears on Google. — Deckill er 02:07, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per Deckiller. Plus, Wikipedia is not working to a deadline. — Bluerです。^なにか? 18:47, 7 May 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.