Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of video game bosses

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. - Mailer Diablo 14:50, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of video game bosses[edit]

I prodded it a few days ago but it was deprodded by User:Crzrussian citing a WP:ILIKEIT argument. Personally, I don't think the article takes any kind of notability into consideration, nor does it properly define what counts as a "video game boss" ("Nazrac (T-Mek)", wtf?). Also, the article sets itself up to be an unverifiable, unmanageable, original research-ridden piece of listcruft. I think it might also be superceded by Category:Computer and video game bosses. Axem Titanium 15:53, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It's POV under the current definition which requires the bosses to be challenging, and removing that would make it unmaintainable. -Amarkov ^blah_edits 16:02, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia articles are not [l]ists or repositories of loosely associated topics. Where any of the individual bosses have their own articles they can be categorised. --DeLarge 16:06, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - as per the above comments. --tgheretford (talk) 18:40, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
delete - Sephiroth isn't hard! all you have to do is.... ok yeah, it's indiscriminate and OR, and there's no way that people will ever be satisfied with the inclusion criteria. Also, many games have multiple bosses, and challanging games will have multiple challanging bosses, without restrictions to genre or platform I think I can say without hyperbole that this list could have a hundred thousand items on it easily if it were sufficiently inclusive. Also, a quick reading reveals a significant content bias towards modern (IE playstation and later) games probably unintended by the author. I think my reaction as a (well, fairly) rational editor thinking "wait, you forgot Kefka!" shows how rapidly this could balloon and get unmaintainable. Wintermut3 18:52, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Split Infinity ^(talk) 18:56, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Amarkov. Danny Lilithborne 00:04, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It is so crufty and large
CVG better take charge
I think it's going to be
Good enough to delete. TTV|talk|contribs|email 00:33, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete far too broad and ill defined for a workable list.-- danntm ^T _C 03:32, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. Koweja 23:27, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as unmanageable list that would be better off as a category. Koweja 23:27, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is a list for the sake of having a list. At best this would make a good category. -Ryanbomber 13:16, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Yet another one. The Kinslayer 10:32, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree that Category:Computer and video game bosses is more or less the same as this list. I don't see a need for such a list to exist. --Pinkkeith 16:45, 21 December 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.